Check out Advice from the Pros section of our forum.
Dear Nikon
Jun 8, 2012 13:23:25 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
If I knew where to send this, I would certainly do it !
Dear Nikon ,
I am so disappointed and disgusted in the AF-S Nikkor 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 lens that came with my D5000.
Seldom do I get a sharp photo with this lens.
I spend too much time trying to correct the photos that I take with this lens.
I feel like throwing the lens into the ocean.
You can almost capture what you want with this lens but the results suck !
I wouldnt give you two cents for another one.
I wound up paying $2400 for a decent lens and another $1.000.00 for a 10-24 which is on the way.
Im almost tempted to switch over to Canon.
What a rip off you are !!!!!
Dear Nikon ,
I am so disappointed and disgusted in the AF-S Nikkor 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 lens that came with my D5000.
Seldom do I get a sharp photo with this lens.
I spend too much time trying to correct the photos that I take with this lens.
I feel like throwing the lens into the ocean.
You can almost capture what you want with this lens but the results suck !
I wouldnt give you two cents for another one.
I wound up paying $2400 for a decent lens and another $1.000.00 for a 10-24 which is on the way.
Im almost tempted to switch over to Canon.
What a rip off you are !!!!!
Jun 8, 2012 13:26:37 #
What lens did you pay $2400 for? I've heard the 18-135 isn't the best.. but there are a lot of good lenses for under 1000
Jun 8, 2012 13:28:56 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G AF-S VR II Nikkor ED-IF Lens $2400
It is so sharp that I never have to edit - Just crop.
It is so sharp that I never have to edit - Just crop.
Check out Digital Artistry section of our forum.
Jun 8, 2012 14:03:01 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
Where is MT Shooter ?
I think I need him.
He's the next Ken Rockwell :)
I really would like to stay with something in th area of the 18-135.
I've spent $3500 on lens this month.
I'm lens poor.
I just want good result's out of my work.
Don't charge me $400 for a camera and $500 for a lens that's worthless :(
I think I need him.
He's the next Ken Rockwell :)
I really would like to stay with something in th area of the 18-135.
I've spent $3500 on lens this month.
I'm lens poor.
I just want good result's out of my work.
Don't charge me $400 for a camera and $500 for a lens that's worthless :(
Jun 8, 2012 14:10:07 #
Jun 8, 2012 14:11:35 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
No - Wouldn't know where to start.
No camera shops where I live.
No camera shops where I live.
Jun 8, 2012 15:56:16 #
cwilliams31 wrote:
No - Wouldn't know where to start.
No camera shops where I live.
No camera shops where I live.
Have you had it under a year? Nikkor lenses, including kit lenses, have an automatic one year warranty, and they also come with a free option to extend that warranty for 4 extra years, if you just fill out the card that comes with it and send it in within 10 days of purchase. I know of people who have taken some great photos with that lens, so don't just assume it's lousy lens! Also, read the instruction manual with the lens as they state the best ways to use the lens. It could just be some simple thing you need to adjust when shooting with that lens. The manuals can be downloaded from www.nikonusa.com ;)
Jun 8, 2012 16:03:21 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
Too late for that.
Don't know how long I've had the lens
But it's been over a year.
I've hear some lens take better photos at a certain mm
and I think this is one of them.
Don't know how long I've had the lens
But it's been over a year.
I've hear some lens take better photos at a certain mm
and I think this is one of them.
Jun 8, 2012 16:04:40 #
i have bought quite a few cameras and the the kit lenses seem to always be pretty useless. but it's a great way to get started.
now i just buy the bodies and the lenses that i know are ok.
now i just buy the bodies and the lenses that i know are ok.
Jun 8, 2012 21:12:22 #
I have has the 18-135mm with my D40 for a few years and, for a kit lens, it has been fine. It does have some barrel distortion at the wide end and I've noticed a little CA, but I've never noticed an issue with sharpness that wasn't my fault.
Congratulations on your purchase of one of the holy trinity.
Congratulations on your purchase of one of the holy trinity.
Jun 9, 2012 06:32:22 #
Mt Shooter may not consider being the next Ken Rockwell a compliment.
Check out Astronomical Photography Forum section of our forum.
Jun 9, 2012 06:38:53 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
Know what you mean - Some like Ken - Some don't because Ken is very opinionated.
MT Shooter is a very smart man tho.
He knows what he's talking about.
I'm defiantly not happy with my 18-135 but I'm sure he could recomend something starting with 18mm.
MT Shooter is a very smart man tho.
He knows what he's talking about.
I'm defiantly not happy with my 18-135 but I'm sure he could recomend something starting with 18mm.
Jun 9, 2012 06:48:00 #
glojo
Loc: South Devon, England
Ken Rockwell review:
Bad News:
1.) It has a plastic bayonet mount. This isn't as bad as you'd think, since this lens is not likely to be mounted and unmounted very often.
2.) It lacks a focus scale, which confuses me. I always am looking at my focus scales.
3.) It has a lot of distortion, if you care.
4.) The distortion at the wide end can't be removed completely in Photoshop CS2's lens distortion filter.
4.) It has a lot of side color fringing at the very wide and telephoto ends of the zoom range which you will see in prints.
5.) Expensive for what you get.
6.) Zoom ring crowded at the telephoto end, making precise composition tougher than with the 18-200mm lens.
Good News:
1.) Very sharp.
2.) Light and compact; fast and easy to use.
3.) Real anytime instant manual focus override. Just move the focus ring!
Don't let me rain on any parades. The 18 - 135mm is going to be a very popular lens for many normal people who just want great photos. I suspect if you're curious enough to be reading this page that you'll probably appreciate the benefits of the 18-200mm VR as I do. The 18 - 200mm VR is enough to be the only lens I take everywhere, the 18-135mm is too much of a compromise for me.
If you're just looking for a decent lens, the much less expensive 18-55mm is just as sharp and perfect for general photos. Save your money and get something else with what you save.
Fence sitting or what? All of us can highlight any type of point to suit our argument. Is the lens sharp or are the images distorted or are they distorted but sharp?
Bad News:
1.) It has a plastic bayonet mount. This isn't as bad as you'd think, since this lens is not likely to be mounted and unmounted very often.
2.) It lacks a focus scale, which confuses me. I always am looking at my focus scales.
3.) It has a lot of distortion, if you care.
4.) The distortion at the wide end can't be removed completely in Photoshop CS2's lens distortion filter.
4.) It has a lot of side color fringing at the very wide and telephoto ends of the zoom range which you will see in prints.
5.) Expensive for what you get.
6.) Zoom ring crowded at the telephoto end, making precise composition tougher than with the 18-200mm lens.
Good News:
1.) Very sharp.
2.) Light and compact; fast and easy to use.
3.) Real anytime instant manual focus override. Just move the focus ring!
Don't let me rain on any parades. The 18 - 135mm is going to be a very popular lens for many normal people who just want great photos. I suspect if you're curious enough to be reading this page that you'll probably appreciate the benefits of the 18-200mm VR as I do. The 18 - 200mm VR is enough to be the only lens I take everywhere, the 18-135mm is too much of a compromise for me.
If you're just looking for a decent lens, the much less expensive 18-55mm is just as sharp and perfect for general photos. Save your money and get something else with what you save.
Fence sitting or what? All of us can highlight any type of point to suit our argument. Is the lens sharp or are the images distorted or are they distorted but sharp?
Jun 9, 2012 06:53:27 #
cwilliams31
Loc: Salisbury, North Carolina
Yep ....
I may have just found what I need - But I also need it to be sharp.
Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f 3.5-5.6G ED VR II Compact Ultra-High Ratio Zoom Lens - 2192
Abt Model: 2192
I may have just found what I need - But I also need it to be sharp.
Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f 3.5-5.6G ED VR II Compact Ultra-High Ratio Zoom Lens - 2192
Abt Model: 2192
Jun 9, 2012 07:25:32 #
glojo
Loc: South Devon, England
I understand where you are coming from but the reality will always be we get what we pay for and I'm sure the lens you are looking at is nice but you will or might have to accept it will not be as good as the f2.8 version? Would you be better off buying a second-hand better quality 200mm zoom lens?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Drone Video and Photography Forum section of our forum.