The infamous Nikon 18-200 AFS-VR I.
Jul 23, 2016 14:07:35 #
jaycoffman
Loc: San Diego
I bought that lens in March because I was going to Machu Picchu and discovered they did not allow an lens longer than 200mm. My only other lens was my Tamron 16-300. Shooting on a D7100. I got similar results as you. My pics were very sharp and it was an easy lens for me to use. I didn't have time to completely research the lens so was unaware that it has problems for some people. I must say if I was going to do it over again I'd still buy it. It's a great walk-around lens.
Jul 23, 2016 15:19:17 #
Bill de is right. Every author has some bias whether they admit it (or know it).
Jul 23, 2016 15:21:56 #
Greetings all,
I have been using the Nikon 18-200mm VR I for many years on a Nikon D90...enlargements up to 13x19 with no issues.
I have been using the Nikon 18-200mm VR I for many years on a Nikon D90...enlargements up to 13x19 with no issues.
Jul 23, 2016 17:02:08 #
jefren
Loc: Montgomery, Alabama
I enjoyed everyone's comments in this post. I may consider such a lens in the future. May I ask why you chose the 18-200 mm over the 18-300 mm? I would value your opinions.
Jul 23, 2016 17:15:49 #
Hi all. Me too, I have been using this lens on my D90 for years with no issues. I use it for almost everything and it just works. Recently photographed a social event and at the end of the night I displayed all the pictures on a 50" HDTV. The pictures looked fantastic, the amount of detail was impressive and everyone loved them. Even me.
Jul 23, 2016 18:25:11 #
Jul 23, 2016 18:54:54 #
I totally agree with you and my wife and I both have the Nikkor 18-200 VR lens on our primary cameras. We have had excellent results and nothing negative to say. Rather than changing lenses, we have Nikkor 70-300 VR on secondary cameras. I got a Nikon P900 with a 24-2000 mm lens for Christmas. It is now my favorite camera for 95% of my shooting. I do a lot of travel, nature, and wildlife photography.
I endorse the 18-200 VR as a wonderful lens.
I endorse the 18-200 VR as a wonderful lens.
Jul 23, 2016 23:11:21 #
MtnMan wrote:
Images are fine.
Just to note something I recently learned about Nikon lens designations. The VR II does not mean it is adifferent version of the VR system. It means the lens is an updated version. The VR might be the same. Or not.
Just to note something I recently learned about Nikon lens designations. The VR II does not mean it is adifferent version of the VR system. It means the lens is an updated version. The VR might be the same. Or not.
It happens to be the same in this particular lens and both have 4 stops of VR. In some lenses, especially the professional ones, AF has been improved along with VR.
The new version has a switch for creeping, something my copy and many others do not have. Optics are the same for both versions.
Jul 23, 2016 23:21:13 #
carlbsc wrote:
I may have missed it, but was a tripod used for the shots shown?
No tripod at all, all of them hand held. When I post more from this lens and I hopefully they will be interesting subjects, I will use a tripod with VR off. Obviously, VR was on for all these shots.
According to Thom Hogan the lens below 100mm offers acceptable results, especially in cameras with 7 and 12 megapixels at all apertures but do poorly in cameras like the D7000 and beyond. All these images were made with the D7000 and I tell you the original files look superb to my eyes at a 50% crop and that by itself is a pretty big enlargement.
This lens is a great choice for traveling. We all know it has compromises like all zooms within this range have but if we do our part the lens will do its part also.
I thank you each and everyone of you for your participation in this thread.
Jul 24, 2016 09:25:50 #
jefren wrote:
I enjoyed everyone's comments in this post. I may consider such a lens in the future. May I ask why you chose the 18-200 mm over the 18-300 mm? I would value your opinions.
Smaller, lighter, cheaper, quicker.
Jul 24, 2016 09:46:03 #
jefren wrote:
I enjoyed everyone's comments in this post. I may consider such a lens in the future. May I ask why you chose the 18-200 mm over the 18-300 mm? I would value your opinions.
Although there has been already a reply to your question I am going to add mine hoping it will be useful.
The 18-300 is also a very good lens but what I wanted was a small, lighter lens to cover general photography while traveling. I already have a 18-70 lens and a 70-300 VR and although image quality could be better than the 18-200 with this combination it also implies carrying two lenses and changing lenses according to subjects. I reasoned that one lens do-it-all in the 18-200 range was all I needed since I seldom use 300mm while traveling.
I paid $200 for this lens that is practically indistinguishable from a new one, a steal in my humble opinion and I am very pleased with its performance. If someone else needs 18-300 for traveling then the latter choice is obviously the better one.
Lenses are only tools and they are selected based mainly on the photographer's needs.
Jul 24, 2016 10:14:39 #
camerapapi wrote:
Although there has been already a reply to your qu... (show quote)
And every time you change a lens you risk dirt entering the body or the back of the lens, and on a trip you don't always have controlled conditions. 18 to 200 offers a wide range of focal lengths that for most general photography is sufficient to cover almost any situation.Gotta love that 18 - 200!
Jul 24, 2016 12:14:00 #
Bear2
Loc: Southeast,, MI
CatMarley wrote:
Smaller, lighter, cheaper, quicker.
Much lighter and sharper.
Jul 24, 2016 15:18:55 #
CatMarley wrote:
And every time you change a lens you risk dirt entering the body or the back of the lens, and on a trip you don't always have controlled conditions. 18 to 200 offers a wide range of focal lengths that for most general photography is sufficient to cover almost any situation.Gotta love that 18 - 200!
In agreement.
Jul 24, 2016 23:52:21 #
I bought and returned the Zuiko 17mm f/2.8 and then acquired the 17mm f/1.8 version instead. In addition to being faster, I believe it's a bit sharper. Increasingly, I believe renting before buying is a wise option.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.