feed back on NIkon 18-200 VR Len

Devananda · Feb 2, 2007

is this worth the money? I read a few reviews and it seam 2 be one of the best lens out there.

I am new to photography and getting a Nikon d80 and was thinking about the flowing lens:
1X nikon 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 G Ed AF
1X nikon 70-300MM F/4-5.6 G AF
I know theses are just the "G" lens but read some good reviews about them they seam like a nice beaner set up.

or should I just get one good lens and save time from upgrading a year or so down the road??

I might be a able to afford the 18-200 VR if i streach the money a bit.
what you you experienced folks think? would serve me best?
I will be doing a wide range of photography from landscape wildlife to people and any thing else that might catch my eye.
thanks
Devananda

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]

shingfan · Feb 2, 2007

this is from a owner of the lense....i think it is totally worth buying...but do be aware that this len is for all purpose use...so the quality is not comparable to lens with more narrow focal range (or prime lense).....but it is very convenient because you almos tnever need to change your lense....also the VR works really great......i would recommend

P.S.....i never compare the quality of this lense to the kit lense...as i never purchase the kit lense...i bought only the camera body..not a kit package.....but all my photog friends (3) say that the quality of this lense is better than the kit

o....and with this lense....it will last you a long time until you find what is your most favourite range...then you can decide to upgrade to a f/2.8 super lense in that specific range

fmw · Feb 2, 2007

The 70-200 VR is also a G lens. Even though I own one, I've never used it with a 35mm camera so it's hard for me to give you much in terms of specific performance parameters. The digital crops out the parts of the frame where lenses perform poorly so most of them look pretty good except those designed for digital.

I have years of experience with the excellent AF80-200 F2.8 and this lens appears to perform about the same. The 80-200 was the best zoom lens I ever used on a 35mm camera. Period. I have seen no visible distortion (but, of course, I'm using it on a digital) Lighting is perfectly even across the frame. Contrast is outstanding for a zoom lens and would even rival that of some of the more complex single focal length lenses.

On the downside, this lens is huge (About the size of a 300mm) and heavy. It is also expensive.

But if you want a telephoto zoom that is as good as telephoto zooms can be, this is certainly one to consider.

Sw1tchFX · Feb 2, 2007

fmw said:
I have years of experience with the excellent AF80-200 F2.8 and this lens appears to perform about the same. The 80-200 was the best zoom lens I ever used on a 35mm camera. Period. I have seen no visible distortion (but, of course, I'm using it on a digital) Lighting is perfectly even across the frame. Contrast is outstanding for a zoom lens and would even rival that of some of the more complex single focal length lenses.

On the downside, this lens is huge (About the size of a 300mm) and heavy. It is also expensive.

But if you want a telephoto zoom that is as good as telephoto zooms can be, this is certainly one to consider.

Agreed 100%

I use the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-D and it's easily my best lens. It and my 35-70 f/2.8. There have been countless times when the f/2.8 aperture saved my butt on the court, field, or anywhere else where there's dim light. With the 80-200 f/2.8, i'm able to walk around shooting, when other people with f/4-5.6 zooms are on their tripods.

If you can use the 18-55 kit and 80-200 f/2.8 until you can afford a better wide-angle zoom, than you'll be set.

JIP · Feb 2, 2007

If you do a search of that lens here you will find many discussions that will steer you away from the 18-200 I personally say stay away from that much zoom range in any lens.

fmw · Feb 3, 2007

Sorry, senior moment. You asked about the 18-200 and I answered with information about another lens. My mistake. No personal experience with the 18-200. Again, sorry.

snownow · Feb 8, 2007

From all i have read, its the consumer lens to have. Super sharp, light, and works well. I ordered one forever ago, and still dont have it

look here for some more info

http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=73398

shingfan · Feb 8, 2007

snownow said:
From all i have read, its the consumer lens to have. Super sharp, light, and works well. I ordered one forever ago, and still dont have it

look here for some more info

http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=73398

where did you order it from?...i ordered mine and got it a month later (i was the 51st in the queue)

snownow · Feb 8, 2007

http://www.adorama.com I have been told its shipping next week.

I should have picked one up from my local store, when they had them. Where did you get yours?

shingfan · Feb 8, 2007

snownow said:
http://www.adorama.com I have been told its shipping next week.

I should have picked one up from my local store, when they had them. Where did you get yours?

i ordered mine from henrys in canada

Patrice · Feb 8, 2007

When I went looking for one last fall I was told to get on a wait list and I might have it by Christmass. Went to another shop - same story. Could not wait that long so I got a 17-55 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 instead. Everytime I use them I'm glad I did it.

shingfan · Feb 9, 2007

Patrice said:
When I went looking for one last fall I was told to get on a wait list and I might have it by Christmass. Went to another shop - same story. Could not wait that long so I got a 17-55 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 instead. Everytime I use them I'm glad I did it.

your lenses (f/2.8) are on a different price figure....i wish i can afford them as well

JIP · Feb 9, 2007

shingfan said:
your lenses (f/2.8) are on a different price figure....i wish i can afford them as well

Yeah but for the kind of money you spend on the 18-200 a very slow lens you can buy at least 1 2.8 lens.

shingfan · Feb 9, 2007

JIP said:
Yeah but for the kind of money you spend on the 18-200 a very slow lens you can buy at least 1 2.8 lens.

but the f/2.8 lense i was interested in.......they are like $1700+.....18-200 is only $900........still miles away

like the on you have.......it is like $2100 (i like but i cant afford)

JIP · Feb 9, 2007

Where are you shopping? I paid $1100 but you can't get that deal but B+H has it for $1600 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...780&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation
Ritz carries it for $1799 http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/5...digital-cameras;cislr-lens;cilenses-for-nikon
Calumet has it for $1799 or less http://www.calumetphoto.com/item/NT21274.html
Not that you planned on buying it but shop around if those are the prices you are getting you need to go elsewhere. If you want a good zoom with a decent range try the 24-120 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...19&is=GREY&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation
Befor the advent of VR I thought this was the best non 2.8 lens that Nikon made now that it is a VR lens that makes it even better.