Nikon 18-200 or tamron 18-270 ?

[jessyd]

Really soon i'm planing to buy the nikon d7000

But i still have a last choice to make... The lens

Is anyone can help me deciding witch one should i buy with my camera. The nikon 18-200 or tamron 18-270 ?

I know it depend what i like to shoot but i'm planing this lens to be my travel lens and by traveling you do really everything! Landscape, wildlife, portrait, sport etc...

Thank you for your help!!

 

[bhop]

From my experiences, the Nikon branded lenses are always better than their counterparts. (I could've saved tons of cash buying Nikon first). That said, the Nikon 18-200 is probably a decent lens (disclaimer: I haven't owned one, but my friend has one), not spectacular and not awful either, but eventually you WILL want to upgrade to something better because eventually you'll start to notice the flaws and limitations.

 

[BZSPhotography]

I have used both these these lenses at the same event, i was using my uncles D90 and i have to say, the Nikorr 18-200 is way better. Regardless of the fact that you'll get an extra 70mm focal length with the tamron, the image quality and sharpness on the nikon are way better (less CA). The deciding factor for me would be, from experience, was the extremely slow focusing speed of the Tamron, the Nikorr focuses faster and more efficiently. I say go with the Nikorr 18-200.

 

[sovietdoc]

Nikon one has less focal length but is better optically. I'd get the Nikon.

 

[Josh220]

Nikon lenses far exceed Tamron lenses.

Another thing to note is that the larger amount of range you try to pack into a lens, the more you tend to sacrifice in performance.

 

[vipgraphx]

I was at this point a while back. I wanted to get the 18-200. I had a chance to test it out at a local camera shop and when I got home and viewed the pictures, they were just ok. At 200mm they were pretty soft. I was impressed with the range and it did feel decent as far as build quality but I would never pay retail for that lens. I would only buy one used. With that said I don't think I would even buy one. After using my 70-200 vrII I was blown away at the quality. Its not a walk around lens but still....My 35mm 1.8g will out perform that 18-200 at 35mm any day and for $200 new.

Don't get me wrong the 18-200 is a great and awesome lens for someone who does not know what they are missing and for the family mom and dad who only want one lens and do not have any vision of getting serious. IF this is you than go for it but buy used if possible so you don't dump all that money into one lens. Have you considered the 18-105mm used at a fraction of the price. Less range but since 200mm is really of no use unless you like non sharp images you can save some money and still get a decent all purpose lens. I had the 18-105 and thought it was really great for vacations but, I sold it with my d90. Now I take my 35mm as a my vacation lens. I find that on vacation you want family pictures so the 35mm is perfect for that. Even when I used the 18-105 most of my pictures were between 18 and 70. On that note the 18-70 is good lens as well but old so finding one in good condition with no dust may be hard. I had that one as well. Not a bad lens but, I sold it because I was not using it as much as my 35mm.

Anyways long story short if you are choosing between those two go nikon as it will hold its resale value better than tamron. Go tamron if the nikon is to expensive for you.

 

[sovietdoc]

Comparing quality of 18-200 to 70-200 VR II. I lol'd.

My friend has 55-250mm stock canon lens that they bundle with their entry DSLRs, she compared the IQ difference at f5.6 to my 70-200 II and went all ZOMGWTFKITTYLAZERS like. But then again, the price difference is 2 grand.

 

[KmH]

Nikon 18-200 or tamron 18-270 ?

Neither. Both are jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none superzoom lenses.

Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II Nikkor Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon DX-Format Digital SLR Cameras

Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD LD Aspherical IF Macro Zoom Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras

To achieve the 11x+ and 15x zoom range of each, to many design compromises that negatively impact image quality have to be made.

But, a lot of people value the single lens convenience over the image quality that can be had by carrying 2 or 3 higher quality lenses instead. So the bottom line is get whichever costs less since image quality isn't the goal.

 

[jessyd]

I will go for nikon 18-200

Thanks for all your advice!!

 

[Michiyo-Fir]

I used to have the 18-200, have used my friend's 18-270. The focus of the 18-200 is much faster and much more accurate than the 18-270. The 18-270 tracks a lot during low light situations, the Nikon is sharper too.

However, that being said, the 18-270 has macro capabilities and the bokeh is nicer. I hated the loud bokeh of my 18-200, it was horrible for any kind of portraiture type shots. So much so that I stopped using it unless I really needed that range. The 18-270's bokeh is much smoother and nicer in quality although the center sharpness not as good.