18-200mm vs 18-300mm

[Doc]

I have a d7500 camera - do you think a Sigma 18-200 would be optically better than a Sigma 18-300mm - either range would suit me - or should I push the boat out and get Nikon 18-200mm

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

You might want to consider the Tamron 16~300mm as well.

I've been using one on a Sony for a while now and in my opinion it's a very useful walk around lens. Some samples at various focal lengths...

16mm...


45mm...



60mm...


90mm...


160mm...


300mm...

 

[Doc]

You might want to consider the Tamron 16~300mm as well.

I've been using one on a Sony for a while now and in my opinion it's a very useful walk around lens. Some samples at various focal lengths...

16mm...
View attachment 331695

45mm...

View attachment 331696

60mm...
View attachment 331690

90mm...
View attachment 331691

160mm...
View attachment 331693

300mm...
View attachment 331694

Thanks for the great images Andrew - certainly going to consider the tamron

 

[Nod]

I have a d7500 camera - do you think a Sigma 18-200 would be optically better than a Sigma 18-300mm - either range would suit me - or should I push the boat out and get Nikon 18-200mm

Yes. Based on the premise that a shorter range of focal length will need fewer compromises. Whether the difference will be that noticeable in real life at normal viewing size is a slightly different question!

Had a Tamron 18-270 which I bought to use on a V1 but it didn't work so I traded it in against a Nikkor 18-200 which is pretty good (and works on the V1!)

 

[g4aaw]

Another vote for the Nikon AFs DX 18-200mm from me.
Very useful when you don't want to carry a load of stuff about.
(D3300 user)

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Whether the difference will be that noticeable in real life at normal viewing size is a slightly different question!

That's a good point.

Someone like myself who thinks in terms of smaller image sizes (say, 1000 x 800 pixels) will have different criteria to someone who prints A1 or A0.

 

[Pound Coin]

I know it isn't what the OP has asked, but I had the 18-200 Nikkor, and then replaced it with the 18-300 Nikkor (for the Olympics).

The 300 had appalling chromatic aberration. I took it to a Nikon dealer and asked if Nikon could look at it. Apparently it was within the tolerances for such a superzoom. Hooray for software correction...

It was entirely practical for what I bought it for*. If it wasn't for the Olympics, I'd have stuck with the 18-200, perfectly good for general walkabout lens.

*Some rowing Gold Medals. Weightlifting. The last gold medal ever in the stadium, presented to a future murderer.

 

[Willenium]

I've had two of the 18-200 VR II lenses and always found them a decent go-to walkabout lens. VR works well and they feel good in the hand. Noticeable amount of distortion as you'd expect with such a focal range though.