Nikon Super Wide Angle-Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF A

[JDArt]

Has anyone used this lens? The range is sure attractive, but the last time I toyed with such a beast, I ended up selling it, as it was too slow and not sharp.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

It's not exactly cheap, so I'd like to be sure that the positive things I'm reading on the net aren't from uncritical beginners.

[Nikonfreak]

I was looking at this lens offering as well and condsidering it for a travel buddy, but I'm always skeptical about any lens that is more than a 3X zoom.

I have the Sigma 50-500 and really like it, but what other really affordable options are there to get you to 500mm that won't break the bank?

Taking a look at anything in the world, not just photography, how many things are really one product solutions?

Can we say that about anything?

I fear that this lens will be the hype today like the 24-120VR was when it was first introduced. Everyone rushed to buy it and then they were disappointed about 3-4 months later when it's limitations and problems really came out.

It has a great range, without a doubt and I hope it is a very good lens, but my skeptical side is waving a big red flag at me.

Now, I am getting excited about the 105 VR... I may have to sell the Sigma 105 in favor of that lens.

Julio

www.pbase.com/loansharkx

[cyclohexane]

I'm skipping it, as the thing's really not as convenient as it seems. Pop-up flashes (i.e. the D70) don't clear it, and I can't see myself using it on my D2H. The 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 is a cheaper and superior choice, as it has enough range to be convenient without being overly slow. Also, if you remove the hood you can use a pop-up flash with it. The money saved can be put towards something like a 50mm f/1.4 or SB-800.

[badpickev]

the reports in the fuji forum on dp are:

sharp, nice to use due to vr, vr allows hand hold at slow shutter speeds. most people reporting on it were surprised at the sharpness and contrast. they also liked the addition of vr.

i would say if someone is looking for an above average walk about lens this might be it.

[film_camears_rule]

I've had this lens for a coupla weeks now, and early report is:* 1/ quite sharp and contrasty* 2/ expected barrel distortion wide* 3/ VRII quite useful...figure 3 stops* 4/ a bit slow at tele end (expected!) 5/ easy to use* 6/ focuses quickly, quietly and accurately 7/ holds zoom setting in vertical orientation.....exactly the kind of lens that it's supposed to be.* Except for special purpose applications, the only lens that replaces it is the 12-24 f/4.

[Shelbell82]

I had that lens when I was shooting w/ an N80. It was very slow and lacked in sharpness. (I have to admit, I am not a big fan of most of the Nikkor G-series lenses.)

[Nikonfreak]

You mean you had the 28-200

The 18-200 is the new VR lens isn't it?

There are a number of top rated "G" model lenses.

The designation of "G" on the lens merely indicates that the lens has no aperature ring and therefore cannot be used with some older Nikon bodies.

There are a few clearly superior "G" lenses.

Nikon 12-24 f/4 G ED

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 AF-S G ED

Nikon 200 f/2 G ED IF AF-S VR

Nikon 300 f/2.8 G ED IF AF-S VR

Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 G ED IF AF-S

Nikon 200-400 f/4 G ED IF AF-S VR

And the jury is still out on the Nikon 105 f/2.8 G ED IF AF-S VR Micro Nikkor

Not to mention I'm a real fan of the Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 G ED AF-S.... a super sharp lens.

Julio

[Shelbell82]

Oh, you are right, my fault. I did have the 28-200, not the 18-200.

I wasn't saying ALL the G-series lenses were bad, I just don't like MOST of them. I currently use the 17-55 f/2:8 and I love it, however, most of the ones I have used were not as great as the other Nikkor lenses that I use and prefer.

[Nikonfreak]

Well...

I absolutely HATE my 70-200 f/2.8 G AF-S VR

It makes all my other lenses look terrible. Why, oh Why does it have to be so good?



Julio

[Shelbell82]

Now I have to agree w/ you there! we just got a 70-200 f/2:8 G AF-S VR in recently and I haven't had a chance to use it, but I am looking forward to it!! As soon as they let us start shooting w/ them at work I plan on taking it w/ me all the time!

[cyclohexane]

There's a true statement about the 70-200 f/2.8G AF-S VR. Between it and the 50mm f/1.8 stopped-down, my 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 gets almost no day-to-day use because I know the sharpness and contrast will be lacking compared to those two. In fact, I'm considering adding a fast (translation = expensive) wide-angle zoom to replace the 18-70mm as I feel like I'm cheating my photos when I use it.

[Jon]

If only it were a constant 2.8.....Wonder how many more zeroes would be in the price tag then!

[Nikonfreak]

Originally Posted by Jon

If only it were a constant 2.8.....Wonder how many more zeroes would be in the price tag then!

Or if you could even carry it.

It'd probably be huge.

I believe there are serious engineering obstacles to overcome for that to become a reality...otherwise I bet we'd have one.

Julio

[Jon]

Originally Posted by Nikonfreak

Or if you could even carry it.

It'd probably be huge.

Natch!

[dvdowns]

Ok so what's the decision here ? I have a D70 with an 18-70 lens and a D50 with a Tamron 28-200 . The trouble is I am using my D50 more than the D70 and it was supposed to be backup . Occasionally I pull out the D70 for the 18mm wide angle but would like to buy another lens , at least as good as the 18-70 , staring in the range of 18mm up to at least 125mm , maybe 200mm . What lens out there is better than the 18-70 in that range ?

[Nikonfreak]

You're not going to find that range in one lens that doesn't have some "compromises" to it.

From everything I've seen, there isn't one that's going to give you that kind of quality in a range larger than about 3X to 4X ...

Most of the pro level glass you'll see won't exceed 3X in range ... give or take a few mm.

Julio

[dvdowns]

ok , I understand the part about compromises but let's say I am satisfied with the quality of the Tamron 28-200 and want something with a range starting at 18 mm and going higher than 70mm with quality acceptable for an amateur like me ? The 18-70mm lens goes for about $450NZ over here , there must be a $1000 lens out there with better quality and a bigger range ?

[Nikonfreak]

The 18-70 is actually a very strong performer in all respects. It's the kit lens that doesn't deserve a kit lens reputation.

Whether or not you'd be happy with the images form the 18-200 is very subjective. I guess it's a matter of how fussy you are about your images with respect to sharpness, contrast, shadow detail, etc.

I'd say wait until a store has one in stock and try one out or buy it...you'd have at minimum 15 days to try it out and see if it meets with your approval or see if there's someone nearby that has one that would allow you to try it, for example a friend in a local camera club or something like that.

That much of a range on a single lens, while enticing to consider, doesn't really excite me much after seeing images from the 24-120.

Others might look at images from the 24-120 and love 'em just as someone might look at a famous artists painting and wonder what the fuss was about.

Julio

[topdog]

Ok so what's the decision here ? I have a D70 with an 18-70 lens and a D50 with a Tamron 28-200 . The trouble is I am using my D50 more than the D70 and it was supposed to be backup . Occasionally I pull out the D70 for the 18mm wide angle but would like to buy another lens , at least as good as the 18-70 , staring in the range *of 18mm up to at least 125mm , maybe 200mm . What lens out there is better than the 18-70 in that range ?

You might be happy with an additional lens for your D70. The 18-70 kit lens is not a bad lens, but I find I use it only for snapshots at indoor parties. If you can find the 18-200 VR lens anywhere at the retail price of $729 you would be quite happy with this lens. Mine stays on the camera and other lenses don't get used much. I have a Nikon 70-200 VR which is presently at Nikon Service. Because of the weight of the lens, I am considering putting it up for sale.

The 18-200 mm does creep when held vertically, but that has not been a huge problem for me.

[Nikonfreak]

I'm shocked.

You'd sell a 70-200 VR in favor of the 18-200? That's a heck of a testimonial there.

I've seen very few lenses in the Nikon lineup that would come close to comparing with the 70-200 f/2.8 VR and I doubt I'd part with that lens for anything.

I've lugged that lens in a backpack at Disney World because I ddin't want to be without it.... I've dragged it through the Florida Everglades.... I've taken it to far away destinations....

Dog...you absolutely floored me.

Julio

www.pbase.com/loansharkx