whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

All: looking for some good advice concerning the Nikon 18-300mm 3.5-5.6 VR lens. I have kit lenses for my d5xxx series cameras which include 18-55, 55-200, and 55-300, all VR AF-S. Get mixed reviews from DPReview concerning warping @ 18mm & vignetting @ or near 300mm. Used price through CC 499.99. Please let me know what you think. Depending on UHH’s thoughts I may need to cancel my order and stick with the lenses I already have. My only reason for looking at the 18-300 was convenience. I know I’ll get some good info from you’all. Need to know as soon as possible. Thanks.

WayneL Loc: Baltimore Md

Have you considered the Sigma 18-300 for $399 new. I use one on my Pentax KP and like it, good IQ and solid build.

John Martin Loc: Troy, MI

I agree with Waynel. I also have the Sigma 18-300 for my D7100 great walk around lens and great images!!

mcmama

I recently got this lens, also for convenience. I love it! It does get a little soft at 300mm, so I try to keep it below 275mm.

CO

I stay away from superzoom lenses. The engineers have to compromise too much in the design. They usually have a lot of barrel distortion at wide settings and a lot of pincushion distortion at long focal lengths. Chromatic aberration can also be higher than with other lenses. The Nikon 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6 has a lot of distortion. LensTip.com does extensive lens testing. Here are some charts from their distortion testing of the lens.

You have so many zoom lenses already that cover most anything. Just a suggestion to get some prime lenses. They usually have almost zero distortion and a large max. aperture - usually f/1.8 or f/1.4. I use a Tamron 45mm f/1.8 SP VC lens on the D750 all the time for outdoor portraits. It has vibration compensation which is great. It also has a metal lens barrel and is fully weather sealed. Very few prime lenses have stabilization. Tamron made the 45mm lens because a focal length between 43mm and 45mm on a full frame camera gives a perspective similar to what the human eye sees. The new SP series primes are the 35mm f/1.8, 45mm f/1.8, and 85mm f/1.8.

-5.32% barrel distortion at 18mm


+ 1.94% pincushion distortion at 300mm

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

👍👍👍

JR45 Loc: Montgomery County, TX

I got this lens about two years ago, mostly for convenience. It spends most of it's time
on a D500. I find that it works best in the 30-35mm to around 270-275mm range.
What distortion there has been, I have been able to correct in post.

ELNikkor

I would get the lens, and don't worry about all the nit-pickin' nay-sayers who complain about distortion/compromises; in most of your shots, you'll never notice. At the same time, get rid of the redundancy by selling the 55-200 and 55-300. Keep the 18-55, as sometimes it is nice to have just the short, light lens on the camera.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I have always liked this lens. But, for what it's worth. This is what Ken Rockwell says about it.
The Nikon 18-300mm VR can replace the combination of 18-55mm VR and 55-300mm VR lenses in one lens.

This one-lens 18-300mm VR solution weighs as much as both other lenses combined, but in exchange for not needing to change lenses between ranges, costs twice as much as the pair.

Don't use this 18-300 on FX or 35mm cameras. It will never fill the frame on 35mm, and you'll only be using the small central area of the FX frame and viewfinder. For FX and 35mm, use the 28-300 VR.

For DX cameras, this lens is an easy recommendation. There is nothing on Earth like this lens. Nothing else covers this huge range with VR and instant manual-focus override. Mud brands like Tamron usually offer cheap copies, sometimes with even broader zoom ranges, but they usually lack full-time manual focus override or good VR, and certainly lack mechanical quality and often lack future compatibility with new Nikon cameras.

This Nikon 18-300mm VR is a big, competent lens. I prefer the smaller 18-200 VR, but if you really need 300mm instead of 200mm, then this 18-300mm VR is your lens. See Nikon 18-200 vs. 28-300 vs. 18-300 for more details.

I prefer a smaller lens over having to carry a bigger lens all the time just for the few times I need 300mm. Most people will jump at the chance to get out to 300mm with a twist of the wrist. Personally, carrying a lens this big for what are supposed to small DX cameras seems silly to me, but most people are going to prefer this lens. Just be careful: what seems not too heavy when first opening your box from Adorama gets a lot heavier after carrying it around your neck all day.

CO

nay-sayers for a good reason. Chromatic aberration is serious with this lens. LensTip calls it a very serious slip-up. Notice the blue and yellow fringing at 50mm and red at 300mm.

(Download)

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

Thanks, all for your excellent responses. I knew I could count on UHH’ers. Guess I’ll stick with the Nikon 18-300. Sigma is cheaper but as usually happens, therefore not quite as good a product. Guess I l’ll probably be getting rid of my Tamron 18-270 AF with no auto focus. Good lens; just dislike not having auto focus capabiliy.

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

Side note; I noticed that several notes about about aberrations, etc. involved 7xxx series cameras. Could this be an issue. Not negative on the 7xxx series; just wondering as the two series cameras are different?

DoyleY Loc: Worland, Wyoming

I have one and it suits it's purpose. It is a handy walk around lens. That's the same reason I bought it. You can expect good pictures from it. It is not the miracle some might think it is. If you want extra sharp I would look elsewhere. Beware it is a dust magnet.

Tommy II Loc: Northern Illinois

Unless you’re a professional photographer, you’ll you’ll enjoy the convenience of not having to change lenses. As far as Nikon vs Sigma or Tamron, I’ve used both models, and again, unless you’re a professional l, you’ll enjoy using any of them. Go out and have fun with whichever you choose.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I share the opinion of staying away from lenses with a big span of focal lengths. Yes, they are convenient, they are very good for traveling, at the wide angle settings they show considerable distortions many times controlled in post with software and they tend to be somewhat soft at the long end. In reality, if the main use of those lenses is for sending files through the Net I would say they are an excellent choice. If the lens will be used for enlargements there will be compromises and it is up to the operator to test the lens to make sure which are the focal lengths and apertures that work best for those enlargements.