Nikon 18-200mm vs 18-55mm and 55-200mm?

snerkler

snerkler

Suspended / Banned
Messages
26,078
Name
Toby
Edit My Images
No
I'm posting on behalf of a friend who is thinking of replacing his standard 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit lenses with the 18-200mm VR, but I shoot full frame and don't know a deal about DX lenses. I've read good things about the 18-200mm but is it better, worse or indifferent in terms of image quality compared to the two kit lenses? Also what is AF speed like in comparison?

Any help appreciated.
 
snerkler said:
I'm posting on behalf of a friend who is thinking of replacing his standard 18-55mm and 55-200mm kit lenses with the 18-200mm VR, but I shoot full frame and don't know a deal about DX lenses. I've read good things about the 18-200mm but is it better, worse or indifferent in terms of image quality compared to the two kit lenses? Also what is AF speed like in comparison?

Any help appreciated.
Click to expand...

It's often stated that two zooms are usually better than a super zoom. I have found the 18-55 and 55-200mm lenses to be okay and if it was my money I would start looking at 17-50mm f2.8 and 70-300mm lenses as an upgrade, or a couple of primes.
 
Swanseajack said:
It's often stated that two zooms are usually better than a super zoom. I have found the 18-55 and 55-200mm lenses to be okay and if it was my money I would start looking at 17-50mm f2.8 and 70-300mm lenses as an upgrade, or a couple of primes.
Click to expand...
They would be my choice as well, but cost has to be kept down. According to DXO the 18-200mm is one point sharper than the 18-55 but 1 point less than the 55-200mm. No point unless convenience is key.
 
A lot depends on what your friend does with their pictures, and how much he values flexibility over technical perfection.

I used an 18-200 on a D90 and it was great. Coped with kitesurfers (who fairly shift) fine. Not as fast to focus as the 17-55 I also had a the time, but fast enough. A3 prints from the lens look sharp and detailed to my eyes.

Since then I have had an 18-55 which I thought was great, and a 55-200 which I didn't. Given the choice I'd go for the 18-200 for convenience sake, but like all superzooms it's biggest flaw is distortion.

IMO he'd lose nothing in image quality terms, but gain in convenience. If he doesn't mind swapping lenses all the time there's little to be gained.
 
snerkler said:
They would be my choice as well, but cost has to be kept down. According to DXO the 18-200mm is one point sharper than the 18-55 but 1 point less than the 55-200mm. No point unless convenience is key.
Click to expand...

Seems like three questions here now, cost, IQ or convenience. Perhaps your friend needs to clarify there preference..in order.

Looking at Amazon prices, there's not much in it for the Tamron 17-50 & 70-300mm lenses over the Nikon 18-200mm if buying new.

Totally agree if convenience is the deciding factor, to get the 18-200 or even the 18-300mm.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
They would be my choice as well, but cost has to be kept down. According to DXO the 18-200mm is one point sharper than the 18-55 but 1 point less than the 55-200mm. No point unless convenience is key.
Click to expand...

Duplicate, seems as if Javascript is playing up on forum.
 
Last edited:
Also ... a lot depends on how your friend operates! I have the kit 18-55, a 12-28, an old 70-300 (no VR), a 35mm and, last but not least, a 18-200.

Unlike most on here, I don't go out with more than one lens. I'm around town with the tiniest of bags with a D5300 and 18-200 attached, my favourite gear.
 
Swanseajack said:
Seems like three questions here now, cost, IQ or convenience. Perhaps your friend needs to clarify there preference..in order.

Looking at Amazon prices, there's not much in it for the Tamron 17-50 & 70-300mm lenses over the Nikon 18-200mm if buying new.

Totally agree if convenience is the deciding factor, to get the 18-200 or even the 18-300mm.
Click to expand...
Yep, agreed trying to find out what he wants is like trying to get blood out of stone sometimes :lol: If it was myself I'd be buying the 17-50mm f2.8 and used 70-300mm VR.
 
I have gone down the 18-200 route, purely for convenience. This is the only Dx lens I have and it actually lives on my V1 with the FT-1 adaptor. Gives an EFL (35mm) of 540mm IIRC. Not much good for wide angles but I have a 12-24 on an FF body for that!
 
Oops! Posted and retried before I knew about the current hamster problem.
 
Last edited:
18-140 VR and 70-300 VR

that's what id buy...
 
I have owned the Nikon AFS-VR 18-200mm since it was first released and it was like Rocking horse **** to get hold of The D2x was Nikons top pro camera at the time if I remember right.
I still have the lens fitted to my D300 or my Fuji S3 or S5pro body along with a Tokina ATX 10-17 fish and Sigma 4mm fisheye.
I can't see me parting with the 18-200mm ever as I have captured so many great memories with it over the years.
The mark II version has a Zoom locks on it but optically is the same to the best of my knowledge.
Both versions can be picked up used at silly low prices now compared to the £800 mine cost all those years ago.
 
Last edited:
What camera body ?
I had an 18-200 a few years back on a D200, sold it when I bought the 70/200 and replaced the lower end with an 18/70
fantastic lens for the money and I still use it
Recently for convenience as a walkabout I bought an 18/300, perfectly acceptable as a convenience walkabout lens but not
as good as my others but for the price certainly acceptable for what I want when I use it.
I think you need to find out what they are looking at using it for, focus speed requirements do depend on what you are
shooting, and also camera capabilities
 
Thanks for the replies so far. @Gremlin it's a D7000. I should be seeing him tomorrow so will try and prize out of him what he wants ;)
 
snerkler said:
Thanks for the replies so far. @Gremlin it's a D7000. I should be seeing him tomorrow so will try and prize out of him what he wants ;)
Click to expand...

I currently use a D7100 & D7200, both work well with the 18/300, not perfect but as I said ideal for a candid walkabout lens.
I can get access to the 18/200 and play if that would be any good
 
Last edited:
Gremlin said:
I currently use a D7100 & D7200, both work well with the 18/300, not perfect but as I said ideal for a candid walkabout lens.
I can get access to the 18/200 and play if that would be any good
Click to expand...
Thanks, that's very kind. I'll see what he says tomorrow, I might have convinced him to go down the 17-50mm f2.8 and 70-300mm route ;)
 
Well I think he'll be going down the 17-50mm/70-300mm route, but I don't think it will be anytime soon as he's just done a firmware update and now the camera won't turn on and so it has to go back to Nikon :facepalm:

Thanks for all the advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top