nikon lens (Page 4): I purchased a Nikon 18-300 3.5-5.6 used that is a great walk-around DX lens with intermediate reasonable distance.

danoliver Loc: South Central Kentucky

NCMtnMan wrote:

What do you plan on using the non-typical range (70-200mm) of the zoom for?

I purchased a Nikon 18-300 3.5-5.6 used that is a great walk-around DX lens with intermediate reasonable distance.

ABJanes Loc: Jersey Boy now Virginia

I believe the 18-140MM f/3.5-5.6 is more highly regarded.

It is the offered kit lens by Nikon for the D-7200 and the D-7500

OZMON wrote:

I am thinking of buying the Nikon 18-200mm dx lens for my d3300, I like landscape photography, is it a good lens for this subject?.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Fotomacher wrote:

The lens you’re considering is described as an “all purpose lens” which to me, means compromise for every situation. If you want to shoot landscapes you will need a decent lens with a field of view of not more that 24mm (FX equivalent). I am also not a fan of variable aperture lenses since - especially on a DX body - you will not have the depth of field control that you will want. My recommendation is the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 lens for serious landscape use.

Do you have the 18-200? If you did, you would be much more sanguine about it! Not a good idea to deprecate or laud something you have never experienced. The 18-200 Nikon is a lens that anybody who owns one loves and uses almost constantly. I gave mine away because I gave away my crop format Nikon cameras in favor of my Fuji. But I miss that lens!

Jack5144

Hi Ozmon, I have used a nikon 18-200 for years. I am also a landscape person, but this lens can do it all and I now use it on my D7100. On my D750 full frame I use a sigma 18 - 105mm Art lens because I wanted to get closer and wider. I hope this helps you. It is a good lens for the money.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

OZMON wrote:

I am thinking of buying the Nikon 18-200mm dx lens for my d3300, I like landscape photography, is it a good lens for this subject?.

Consider the Tamron 3.5-6.3 18-200. Good for all around photography, gets decent ratings and a bargain at $199 and 6 yr Tamron warranty. Not the brightest lens but does very well in sunlight or flash.

Silverman Loc: Michigan

OZMON wrote:

I am thinking of buying the Nikon 18-200mm dx lens for my d3300, I like landscape photography, is it a good lens for this subject?.

F.Y.I., I have read some reports that mentioned that the Nikon 18-200 DX Lens has definite "Lens Drift", also it was said to be a Heavy Lens. You might consider Renting a lens first before you bye

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Silverman wrote:

F.Y.I., I have read some reports that mentioned that the Nikon 18-200 DX Lens has definite "Lens Drift", also it was said to be a Heavy Lens. You might consider Renting a lens first before you bye

Again, to advise or criticize on the basis of reading about the lens, seems unhelpful. For instance, I have used the 18-200 for a few years, and it had no "drift" and for what it is, a 27mm to 300mm equivalent superzoom, I found it neither heavy nor bulky. I would recommend using a lens before you either recommend it or disparage it.

MauiMoto Loc: Hawaii

OZMON wrote:

thanks for all replies.
I am currently using a 16-85 mm dx lens with vr, it is a good lens but sometimes I need that extra zoom when shooting mountains that are far away etc.

Sounds like you don't want to carry or change lenses in the field. I have lenses from 8 to 800mm, fast and slow and the 18-200mm zoom is what I normally keep on the the camera in the dx bag and the one that I carry when I don't carry my bag. I think it's the best choice for what you're asking.

User ID

amfoto1 wrote:

For landscape photography specifically, I would find
the short to moderately long telephoto, 56-200mm
range of focal lengths that lens would give you next
to worthless. It certainly wouldn't be my choice!

..............

Soooooo shortsighted .... unimaginative, too.

Sure. Get your extry wide, join the lemmings.
Go shoot more of those so-called landscapes.

.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

amfoto1 wrote:

For landscape photography specifically, I would find the short to moderately long telephoto, 56-200mm range of focal lengths that lens would give you next to worthless. It certainly wouldn't be my choice!

He didn't say that landscapes are the only thing he shoots. Obviously, You have an extensive collection of cameras and lenses to outfit any special situation you set out to photograph. But what about a workhorse lens for a guy who only has a few, and likes to travel light? The 18-200 covers a lot of subjects INCLUDING landscapes, and does a darn good job of it. No it wouldn't be your choice based on the extensive armory you claim to own, but it would be for someone who wants a good versatile lens that will let him shoot landscapes. portraits, and catch some good wildlife shots too.

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

Silverman wrote:

F.Y.I., I have read some reports that mentioned that the Nikon 18-200 DX Lens has definite "Lens Drift", also it was said to be a Heavy Lens. You might consider Renting a lens first before you bye

You obviously have never used the 18-200 or you would know it is not HEAVY. And, if you ever used the lens, you would know it delivers excellent quality images. Even Ken Rockwell is impressed (but that doesn't take much).
Anyway, I find it interesting what folks post here who have never personally used a product, but they claim they READ SOME REPORTS, which are meaningless and do not help the person looking for advice.
If you have never used a product, don't comment.

sv3noKin51E

Ozmon, we have the the original Nikon 18-200mm VR. It's infamous for developing lens creep, but as with all of the older lens before locks came along, it's quite manageable unless you forget and carry it pointed downward. Those spiffy/large rubber bands help somewhat, and it's a classic, great lens. A few of the early units that weren't very good, and wound up being sent back to Nikon. The 2nd production run ironed out most of the issues and it's rare when folks turn loose of one. Good luck, sv

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

billnikon wrote:

You obviously have never used the 18-200 or you would know it is not HEAVY. And, if you ever used the lens, you would know it delivers excellent quality images. Even Ken Rockwell is impressed (but that doesn't take much).
Anyway, I find it interesting what folks post here who have never personally used a product, but they claim they READ SOME REPORTS, which are meaningless and do not help the person looking for advice.
If you have never used a product, don't comment.

jdmarks64

I got a 18-200mm lens when I purchased my D500 two years ago. I find it versatile and reliable. A great lens if you're only going to carry one.

marty wild Loc: England

OZMON wrote:

I am thinking of buying the Nikon 18-200mm dx lens for my d3300, I like landscape photography, is it a good lens for this subject?.

I have this lens, there's two versions I believe. Get Mk2 this has lens lock and don't forget to lock it! You will clout it on every gate post and door frame if you don't. It's my walk around lens. It's on my Tank in a bag D200. It's sharpest 150mm to 180mm a little soft at 200mm but still ok and acceptable. Very nice 20 to 140mm. If you edit your work you will like your investment. If you P/m me I will send you images I have taken through the range of this nice glass at 10 MPixs