Broke my 18-135 Nikkor Lens. AAAHHH!!! NEW LENS

[JeramyJ]

Well Dadgum. Dropped the camera on the floor last night from around table height. Landed lens first and did some internal damage. I can see the aperture in the lens flopping around and it will not zoom properly. Obviously broken. UGH!! :x:thumbdown:

So, today I stopped by the shop and picked up a new Nikon D90 with the kit lens 18-105 VR. Not big on the lens included. However, I needed a multi purpose lens. I may actually sell the included lens and pick up the Nikkor 18-200VR which I hear is better. (Is that so?) Also picked up the 105 Nikkor Micro 2.8 VR lens for my wife for V-Day. Woohoo!

Spent some cheese but I suppose it was for a good cause.

 

[KmH]

So, today I stopped by the shop and picked up a new Nikon D90 with the kit lens 18-105 VR. I may actually sell the included lens and pick up the Nikkor 18-200VR which I hear is better. (Is that so?)

Bummer on the fumble!

No, the 18-200 is NOT better than the 18-105, unless your definition of better is convienience, not image quality.

Nikon's 18-200 has the worst distortion of any Nikon lens made today. The barrel distortion at 18 mm is very complex, particularly in the corners. It's virtually unfixable in post processing.

I'd say stick with the 18-105.

 

[SushiWarrior]

I would suggest the 18-200, it isn't perfect quality wise but you'll make way more shots than most other lenses. I think I'd be happier filling the frame with the subject than worrying about a line that isn't straight in the corners.

And the VR in it is excellent.

 

[JeramyJ]

So, today I stopped by the shop and picked up a new Nikon D90 with the kit lens 18-105 VR. I may actually sell the included lens and pick up the Nikkor 18-200VR which I hear is better. (Is that so?)

Bummer on the fumble!

No, the 18-200 is NOT better than the 18-105, unless your definition of better is convienience, not image quality.

Nikon's 18-200 has the worst distortion of any Nikon lens made today. The barrel distortion at 18 mm is very complex, particularly in the corners. It's virtually unfixable in post processing.

I'd say stick with the 18-105.

Honestly, I have no real hands on experience thus far. Maybe I will have to use this one for a bit and decide later. I was simply going off of a few reviews that I have read downing the 18-105. Don't know what to think anymore.

Thanks for the info though.

 

[Darkhunter139]

I would suggest the 18-200, it isn't perfect quality wise but you'll make way more shots than most other lenses. I think I'd be happier filling the frame with the subject than worrying about a line that isn't straight in the corners.

And the VR in it is excellent.

I wouldn't spend that much money on a lens with known flaws. Id rather keep the kit lens and get a nice telephoto to go along with it.

 

[SushiWarrior]

Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX Lens Review: 3. Test results: Digital Photography Review

I don't see any complex distortion there really....

EDIT: My bad.

The distortion shown by this lens in our studio tests was so marked that we felt it merited illustration with some real-world shots. Barrel distortion at wideangle isn't unusual on zooms, but this lens is worse than most, and it has a complex 'wave' pattern with recorrection towards the corners, making software correction relatively tricky. It's also rare that we find pincushion distortion so pronounced as to be visually disturbing, but that can be the case between 35mm and 70mm; the good news is that the pattern is simpler, and can be readily corrected in software if desired.

 

[JeramyJ]

Not sure about the image quality of the 18-200. However, thus far I have been unimpressed with the 18-105. It seems the VR does absolutely nothing and any image out to the 105 range is just not crisp. Going to go back to the shop and swap out the lens for a different one I think.

After a test with the 100mm Micro 2.8 lens though. That thing ROCKS!! The wife will love it.