which lens..

[dannylightning]

i would much rather have the 300mm zoom over the 200mm but i am guessing the 18-200mm is a much better lens and it would be nice just to have one lens..

my main concern would be this, will one of these give me better picture quality than the other and if so will it really be a noticeable difference. if the answer is yes than i will go for the one with the better pic quality, if the anser is no ill go for the less expensive 55-300mm lens.


Amazon.com : Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR : Camera Lenses : Camera & Photo

Amazon.com : Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II Nikkor Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon DX-Format Digital SLR Cameras : Digital Slr Camera Lenses : Camera & Photo

 

[PaulWog]

Get the 70-300 vr if you can. I got mine on sale new for $420. Better iq.

Only get the 18-200 if you want the 18-70 range in addition. The iq is similar to the 55-300. The last 100mm reach might matter to you.

 

[Derrel]

The 18-200 lens is widely available used, in two versions, and it has the "wide angle end", from 18mm to 30mm in its range, which make that lens very capable as an all-in-one lens, especially on older, lower megapixel bodies. The 55-300 is a newer design, and is in effect a telephoto-ONLY range zoom lens on APS-C cameras; 55mm x 1.5 means the 55mm setting is a short telephoto lens view!!! This lens would be lousy at close ranges, since it utterly lacks any wider-view options. These types of wide-range zoom lenses are not sold based on top quality, but on handiness and flexibility. Look into some good on-line reviews of each lens. It's not that these things are "terrible lenses" under all conditions or at all zoom settings, but they are not "the best", and yet, they CAN ACTUALLY MAKE some good pictures, with minimal hassles, and a lot of convenience, and with freedom from constant lens changing.

 

[dannylightning]

i am not really looking for a wide angle, the kit lens does well for that. i just want something that will be good for wildlife and things i want to zoom in on that are far away, 300mm sure would be nice. from what i understand the 70-300 will not work on the D5200 or i would pick up that lens for sure. looks like that is not compatible on the DX format cameras, on amazon you can tell it what camera you have and it says no to the D5200,D7000 and D7100 it did not have a choice for the D5300 but if it does not work with the others than i am screwed.

ill probably end up getting the 18-200mm lens, it would be nice to only have one lens but a bit more zoom would be nice. from what i understand the 70-300 has better quality than the others so its a shame i cant use it. i actually ordered it and than canceled it after i realized it would not work.

got on the Nikon website and looked at question and answers for the 70-300 mm lens and it looks like the auto focus will not work with my camera, i like to get moving animals and what not, so that lens is out.

 

[shadowlands]

The 70-300 VR would work for it's AF-S.
The 18-200 VR is a great travel lens. I once owned it. Made money with it. It's not as bad as some say.
The 18-300 VR is nice, but it's a monster.

 

[robbins.photo]

i am not really looking for a wide angle, the kit lens does well for that. i just want something that will be good for wildlife and things i want to zoom in on that are far away, 300mm sure would be nice. from what i understand the 70-300 will not work on the D5200 or i would pick up that lens for sure. looks like that is not compatible on the DX format cameras, on amazon you can tell it what camera you have and it says no to the D5200,D7000 and D7100 it did not have a choice for the D5300 but if it does not work with the others than i am screwed.

ill probably end up getting the 18-200mm lens, it would be nice to only have one lens but a bit more zoom would be nice. from what i understand the 70-300 has better quality than the others so its a shame i cant use it. i actually ordered it and than canceled it after i realized it would not work.

got on the Nikon website and looked at question and answers for the 70-300 mm lens and it looks like the auto focus will not work with my camera, i like to get moving animals and what not, so that lens is out.

Danny, there are a lot of different versions of 70-300 mm lenses in the Nikon mount out there, some do not have built in focus motors so they will not autofocus with the D3xxxx, D5xxxx series cameras.. that is true.

However there are a lot of 70-300 mm lenses out there that do have built in focus motors and will autofocus fine with the D5xxx/D3xxx series cameras.

The Nikkor 70-300 mm AF-S G VR lens is one example. The important designation on a Nikkor lens is SWM - Silent Wave Motor. If it has one, it will work fine and autofocus with no problems on any Nikon.

Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED 2161 B&H

I myself use a Tamron 70-300 mm that also features it's own built in focus motor on my D5200, works like a charm. I think the IQ is comparable to the Nikkor and it was a lot cheaper used.

Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD Telephoto AFA005NII-700 B&H

In the Tamron or Sigma lenses look for "HSM", Hypersonic Motor - again this will indicate it has an autofocus motor built into the lens.

 

[dannylightning]

this was the one i was looking at, but on amazon it says no do not work, and on the nikon site it says you will only have manual focus so i dont want to risk ordering it, they had a referbished one for 370 bucks, that was what i tried to order and canceled the order.. http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-300m...1&keywords=Nikon+AF-S+VR+Zoom-NIKKOR+70-300mm

it does say it has a silent wave motor so i dont know.

i may just end up getting the 18-200, i am sure that would work out pretty well for most anything i want to shoot. but i do remember on my old nikon i had a 200mm lens and always wished it could zoom in a little more. but i was happy with it over all.

photos from this camera seem to crop really well. just got back from the state park, got some pics of ducks and birds and i really had to crop some of them and the picture is still showing up full screen on my computer. that is pretty impressive, a 200mm might be all i need in that case.

 

[robbins.photo]

Well amazon would not be my first choice. Especially for used. Too high of a chance that you'd be dealing with someone that doesn't know the difference between the afs-g vr version and an older version without the motor.

I'll see if Keh has any used when I get home and post a link or two.

 

[dannylightning]

thanks. a zoom is definitely needed, i was not that far away from these birds and you can barley see them, i did get up pretty close to some ducks but there was too much stuff in the way. not sure why the the pic of the far away birds did not show up.

 

[robbins.photo]

Ok, used from KEH - I've bought a lot of stuff from them including several lenses and one camera body, all used - never had any problems or issues with anything. They really are a first rate outfit, and unlike most of the folks on Amazon they know their stuff:

https://www.keh.com/246717/nikon-70-300mm-f-4-5-5-6-g-ed-if-af-s-vr-autofocus-lens-67

 

[dannylightning]

thank you, i see they have some used 18-200 lenses too, i have been looking at a bunch of photos people have taken with those lenses and they both look great. so i guess my main choice is a bit more convenience or a bit more zoom.

one thing i have read a few times, you are probably better off getting a DX lens if you have a DX camera, something about a DX camera wont use the whole lens or something like that, i did see a few people say that might actually be a benefit, i don't know, but i am starting to think the 18-200 might be my best bet. the galory of 300+ photos that are said to be taken with that lens, most of them look great. a few were pretty bad but i am guessing that person did not know how to use their camera.

 

[robbins.photo]

thank you, i see they have some used 18-200 lenses too, i have been looking at a bunch of photos people have taken with those lenses and they both look great. so i guess my main choice is a bit more convenience or a bit more zoom.

one thing i have read a few times, you are probably better off getting a DX lens if you have a DX camera, something about a DX camera wont use the whole lens or something like that, i did see a few people say that might actually be a benefit, i don't know, but i am starting to think the 18-200 might be my best bet. the galory of 300+ photos that are said to be taken with that lens, most of them look great. a few were pretty bad but i am guessing that person did not know how to use their camera.

Ok, the straight and narrow on FX and DX lenses on an DX body. If you can afford it get the FX lens all day and twice on Sunday, hands down, no question. Here's why. The best part of any lens is the center of the glass. As you start getting out to the corners you will always have some issues, it's just a function of the lens design and there is no way to avoid it. It happens on all lenses - the more expensive the lens, the less dramatic the difference - but the center of the glass will always be better than the corners.

When you use an FX lens on a DX body, what happens is your using the best part of the glass - the center, and not the edges. If you use a DX lens on a DX body, yes.. it does use the whole lens. But this is not a benefit, because it is being forced to used the edges as well. So if you can afford an FX lens, it is better to have one on a DX body than a DX lens.

Good example, I own a 70-200 mm Sigma OS f 2.8 lens. When you go out and read the lens reviews you'll see they are mixed, more than a few reviews will complain about vignetting or softness in the corners. If you read a little further you find out why - they are using high end full frame cameras to test the lens.

The guys who are using this same lens on a DX body will never mention such issues, and if they do they only do so in relation to someone elses review. Why? They don't see the problem because their camera isn't using the edges of the glass, just the much better section in the center.

Now, that's not to say that all DX lenses are garbage or that they can't be used or whatever, but if your really want the best image quality and all the other factors are equal, you'll get better results out of an FX lens on a DX body than you will out of a DX lens. Just keep in mind it's rare that all other factors are equal.. lol.

Ok, now me I would prefer the 70-300 mm because I have owned one before and the images it can take are truly remarkable. I've stayed away from lenses that have a longer variance in focal length like say an 18-200, 18-300, etc - because while these lenses do "OK" as a function of their design you'll run into certain weaknesses - they are never going to be as good at 300 mm shot wide open as the 70-300 mm can be - etc.

That's not to say that they are useless lenses - people do get some really good use out of them. But if you want the best IQ, you'll be better off with lenses that don't have to cover such a wide focal length. If IQ is less important than the convenience factor, well then maybe that would be a good choice for you. Just sort of depends on which works best for you.

 

[dannylightning]

thank you, i see they have some used 18-200 lenses too, i have been looking at a bunch of photos people have taken with those lenses and they both look great. so i guess my main choice is a bit more convenience or a bit more zoom.

one thing i have read a few times, you are probably better off getting a DX lens if you have a DX camera, something about a DX camera wont use the whole lens or something like that, i did see a few people say that might actually be a benefit, i don't know, but i am starting to think the 18-200 might be my best bet. the galory of 300+ photos that are said to be taken with that lens, most of them look great. a few were pretty bad but i am guessing that person did not know how to use their camera.

Ok, the straight and narrow on FX and DX lenses on an DX body. If you can afford it get the FX lens all day and twice on Sunday, hands down, no question. Here's why. The best part of any lens is the center of the glass. As you start getting out to the corners you will always have some issues, it's just a function of the lens design and there is no way to avoid it. It happens on all lenses - the more expensive the lens, the less dramatic the difference - but the center of the glass will always be better than the corners.

When you use an FX lens on a DX body, what happens is your using the best part of the glass - the center, and not the edges. If you use a DX lens on a DX body, yes.. it does use the whole lens. But this is not a benefit, because it is being forced to used the edges as well. So if you can afford an FX lens, it is better to have one on a DX body than a DX lens.

Good example, I own a 70-200 mm Sigma OS f 2.8 lens. When you go out and read the lens reviews you'll see they are mixed, more than a few reviews will complain about vignetting or softness in the corners. If you read a little further you find out why - they are using high end full frame cameras to test the lens.

The guys who are using this same lens on a DX body will never mention such issues, and if they do they only do so in relation to someone elses review. Why? They don't see the problem because their camera isn't using the edges of the glass, just the much better section in the center.

Now, that's not to say that all DX lenses are garbage or that they can't be used or whatever, but if your really want the best image quality and all the other factors are equal, you'll get better results out of an FX lens on a DX body than you will out of a DX lens. Just keep in mind it's rare that all other factors are equal.. lol.

Ok, now me I would prefer the 70-300 mm because I have owned one before and the images it can take are truly remarkable. I've stayed away from lenses that have a longer variance in focal length like say an 18-200, 18-300, etc - because while these lenses do "OK" as a function of their design you'll run into certain weaknesses - they are never going to be as good at 300 mm shot wide open as the 70-300 mm can be - etc.

That's not to say that they are useless lenses - people do get some really good use out of them. But if you want the best IQ, you'll be better off with lenses that don't have to cover such a wide focal length. If IQ is less important than the convenience factor, well then maybe that would be a good choice for you. Just sort of depends on which works best for you.

thank you for your help. i been looking at even more pics people have taken with the 18-200 and the 70-300 and there are some amazing images with both.. from some of the reading i have done on these it looks like i will get better images with the 18-200 mm lens than i will with the kit lens, so that has me thinking maybe i should try out one of these. i see the high quality lenses similar to the kit lens just say a 16-55mm lens are quite expensive. so if i could get better quality photos with the 18-200 when i am using it in the 18-55mm range than i will with the kit lens that might be a good option. plus it would be nice to just have one lens..

so right now i am trying to decide on which lens to get, it will be one of those two lenses, i guess i am gonna think it over for a few days,

 

[robbins.photo]

No worries at all, happy to help. No matter which lens you end up going with I'm sure you'll be happy with either choice. The 18-200 will most likely be a higher IQ than the kit lens in most situations, the 70-300 mm will give you even better IQ and a little longer reach so really no bad choices there either way. One thing to consider, i don't know about your own shooting style but I've noticed for me at least I prefer to have much faster glass on my shorter lenses when possible, so I actually went with a 50 mm AF-S G 1.8 - and when I do replace the wide angle I'll most likely be looking at a short zoom in the 2.8 category. I have 2 cameras at the moment so I can mount the shorter, faster glass on one and the telephoto on the other - but even when I'm only carrying one I don't mind swapping out the glass. I just like having the option of the faster glass when it's needed, which might be something to consider before making your purchase.

But either way I don't think there is a "wrong" or "bad" choice here, it's just finding the lens that works best for you and the shooting situations you find yourself in most often.

 

[dannylightning]

i really like to go to a state park or some place similar, mainly landscapes and animals, i do like some night photography, long exposures such as this but i do not do that often. that was taken on my old DSLR i think it was a D50 or D60 with either the kit lens or the low end 550-200mm lens i had. ill post a few other pics so you can see the type of shooting i like to do. sometimes i shoot people but not very often.. generally i just shoot stuff like this.. i would love to have a really wide angle lens but those appear to be on the expensive side so i guess the 18mm will have to do.. it always worked well before. i am not sure i really need a fast lens, but something with a 1.8F or what ever would also be awesome for doing some night shooting. but again i do not want to spend allot of money on lenses. i plan to get a zoom lens for now and maybe one more lens down the road but probably not any time soon. cant spend to much money right now.
.