Nikon 18-200MM F3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX

I have one, I think it's really good but I hardly use mine now though...

There is a significant amount of distortion through some of the wider focal lengths though, thats the only downside to it, but it's a great all round lens.

Depends on what you want to get into really, then chose the lens.
 
It's a great lens...
But, I'm starting to wish I had gone for a 70-200 VR, ok a fair bit more money but after a while the limitations start to bug you.
If I were to start again, I'd get a 50mm, then a wide zoom, then a 70-200.

What do you currently have?
 
Some people love this lens, others hate it, as has already been said it really depends what your going to use it for as it does have limitations, but if it's just for a general walkabout lens it can be pretty good with a bit of after post processing, i used it on holiday in Thailand last year, take a look at some of the shots i got with it HERE, some are not bad :)
 
Ken Rockwell says "It's a miracle! I bought mine in November 2005 and love it. It's replaced an entire bag of lenses.....more than just a new lens. It's changed the way I live....the world's best portrait lens"

:nuts::cuckoo::lol:
 
I have this lens and it spends most of the time on my camera. For the price (particularly if got second hand), it a good quality and very versatile lens especially with the benefit of VR. I've never experienced much of the distortion issues mentioned above when wide either.

Of course i'd love the 70-200VR Nikon, but then it's way over £1000 :lol:
 
waiting for responses
 
I bought mine on the basis of his review.
He obviously knows his stuff, and has taken some good photo's in the past.
But when you buy this miracle, it gets disappointing finding it's limits. I'm getting into gig photography and that can be really hard work, blimey it can be hard work with a nifty let alone the 18-200.
I just think that at some point, especially in the UK, you'll want something faster and it's essential for anything that moves.
 
Another couple here taken with the 18-200mm, a bit of PP on both of them, but it gives you an idea of it's capabilities for a walkabout.

The tiger was behind glass, which i was quite happy about :D

Tiger-1.jpg


Croc-2.jpg
 
I use mine as a general walkabout lens, but as mentioned, it does have it's limitations.

Personally I've used it as a stopgap between buying the camera body and then filling the range (circa 18mm to 200mm) with good quality optics.

Basically, it's a jack of all trades lens, but doesn't excel at anything apart from meaning less weight due to carrying 1 lens.
 
Fantastic lens - the only reason I'm getting rid of mine is because I've jumped ship to Canon.

The 18-200 vr totally kills the Canon and Sigma offerings...a total pleasure to use.

Cheers,
James
 
I bought this lens with my D300 last year and use it 95% of the time. Used for my recent trip to Oz and KL examples can be seen in my Flickr and also in a few posts on TP Here and Here.

I seem to get more consistant results using it at around f/8 for Landscapes but haven't got any complaints it allows great flexibility all in the one lens.

Paul
 
I have both the 18-200 and 70-200. Both lenses are absolutely brilliant, but as said, the lack of a constant open aperture on the 18-200 is a downside. However, IQ is excellent and as a general lens, probably one of the best. Pretty easy to carry around, too.
 
It's really good for beginners, but once you've used faster lenses it gets a bit disappointing as it's not the miracle ken rockwell makes it out to be! The apertures narrow very quickly as you work through the focal range, making shallow depth of field very difficult to get and to make look good, IMO.
 
The only reason I can see to buy one is to avoid having to change lenses, in which case you'd be as well buying a bridge camera.....
 
for the range it covers it's very good.

i honestly rate it and think everyone should have one in their collection
 
The optical quality is really very impressive indeed. I have had a couple of prints at A3 from the S5Pro I had which came out beautifully and I'd rate it alongside the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 ex and Nikon 70-300 vr that it replaced, not having to change lenses all the time was a treat too. I just kick myself that Canon fit does not have a lens of comparable quality :(

Cheers,
James
 
I prefer it to my kit lens and I'll use it for outdoor shoots.. I don't think it's anything to write home about. But then, I prefer prime lenses anyway. *shrug*
 
Flash In The Pan said:
The only reason I can see to buy one is to avoid having to change lenses, in which case you'd be as well buying a bridge camera.....
Click to expand...

:thumbsdown:Totally disagree with this i'm afraid.

The lens is perfect for travel, general purpose photography and also for those of us who are not in the position to buy multiple lenses @ £1000+. It allowed me to buy the D300 and concentrate on learning about the camera and it's settings and not get distracted with constant changing of lenses. When I am in a position to buy the specialist lenses I would like, I'm not stuck with a fixed lens bridge camera.
 
I have one and use it most of the time. I don't think it's that razor sharp nor that quick. Good glass if you can only have one. I thought it was going to be a gift from god ala Ken Rockwell...but a lil disappointed.
 
My two penneth...

If you want it as a general walkabout lens then go for it.

For IQ I'd look at fixed aperture lenses....along the lines of the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and a Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (AF-S).
 
This is really interesting, seems to be a 50/50 split between great and not bad. Sounds as if I'll just get one any way as it will serve a purpose. Cheers Guys for the feed back
 
I had it as a generalist daytime lens for walking around on my D300, and it's great for that. Sharpness is good, VR is excellent, and distortion can be corrected mostly fairly easily. I didn't find it hugely noticeable anyway. It's a little slow for anything other than daylight use unless you're using flash, and I wouldn't really use it for portraits. The great thing about it is that you can reel pretty much any shot you like into frame with the twist of your wrist without walking anywhere, which is great if you're a tourist somewhere and don't know what you're looking to photograph. It's pretty light and compact too, considering what a large range it has, but this is no doubt down to it's DX-ness, so the ideal solution to travelling light with a DSLR. Problems are that it has a big tendency to zoom creep, which is *very* annoying when you have it tripod mounted and trying to take shots in a downwards direction (still life shots etc) which will drive you bonkers. It's also not the best lens for bokeh. Things in the background look more like they're vibrating rapidly than nicely soft & fuzzy. I have my 105 f2.8 Micro or 50mm f1.4 for portraits & bokeh though, depending on how much space I have... The 18-200mm, perhaps unsurprisingly, is a bit of a jack-of-all-trades - the swiss army knife of lenses - OK at most things but outstanding at none. I'm selling mine to my father for his D80, because he's not a changing lenses kind of guy. I'm moving to a D700, so DX lenses won't be any good to me. They're going for around £400 on eBay right now, which is a pretty good deal.
 
Will B said:
Thanks for that guys, I've just got a kit 18-55 at the moment, i am seriously considering the 18-200 but also sigma 70-200f/2.8
Click to expand...

If your thinking about the sigma 70-200 keep that thought! I got one from the classifieds here. Its a great lens and you can add a 1.4x tc for some extra length. If you get the 18-200 your kit lens will be redundant which is a shame as a kit lens it is pretty good. The main question is do you want a jack of all trades lens.
 
I've had two of these. I bought one, loved it and then bought a couple of prime lenses. Fell out of love with the 18-200. I then decided it was a pain in the arse just having prime lenses and so bought another 18-200. Had it for some time but was never really happy with it. Eventually I got rid. If I was going travelling and had limited space for camera gear, I'd buy this lens but these days I want high quality images out of my camera and I just don't feel the 18-200 is really up to it. It is a fab lens for what it is and what it does but recognise it's limitations and you won't go far wrong with it.
 
I've been after one of these for awhile. It would be a walkbout lens for out in the hills or out on the mountain bike to replace my 18-135 kit lens. I've seen plenty good shots with it covering similar subjects and given how happy i am with the 18-135(that people seem to hate) it should be fine.
Digital Photo mag liked it giving it a silver award in a group test, interestingly the Sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3 OS beat it overall and on image quality. Its also quite a bit cheaper £288 vs £540 ;)
 
Cheers all for your great feed back, guess I'm gonna bite the bullet anf plump for a couple of f/2.8's on 2 body's-----eventually that is. Thanks again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top