Is this too good to be true? 18-200 Lens

[makeupgrl8]

My instructor from my photography class recommended this lens:

Used Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II 2192 B&H

and I found this on Craigslist:

Nikon 18-200 mm VR DX Lens

These are the same, right? Is this deal too good to be true? I offered $400 and he said he would take it. PLMK.

Thanks!

 

[BD_Avant]

Someone more knowledgable than me may need to chime in here, but I don't think they're the same. The one on Craigslist is the older version of the one your instructor recommended. Here is a site that explains the differences: Difference Between Nikon VR and VR II | Difference Between | Nikon VR vs VR II

 

[Patrice]

Go take a look at it and if all is well and you're ok with the price then go for it.

Look at the various selling sites for a price comparison. I might not want to pay that much for a first generation so-so lens which is said to be worst than the improved, but still only so-so lens.

 

[sm4him]

I thought someone who actually knows what they're talking about would have chimed in by now. Since they haven't, I'll just say this:

--No, they're not the same. The VRII is newer and, I think, quite a bit better (AND therefore, more expensive, by quite a lot).
--The version shown in the photo DOES at least look to be an AF-S lens, but the VR instead of VRII. Still, B&H has that lens right now for $499 and $529, used, so if you can confirm that the lens is in good working order, I'd think $400 is a more-than-decent price on it.

 

[KmH]

Yep. $400 sounds good if the lens is in good condition. Unfortunately, because of the 16x+ zoom range it is a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none lens that has some image quality issues. Whenever possible avoid using either version of the the lens from 18-35 mm, from 125 to 140 mm and from 180 mm to 200. Otherwise the lens does an OK, but only OK, job. Also don't use the lens at the near limit of it's focus limit distance for each focal length.

This review is for the older version. The optics of both versions are essentially the same. Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX review: Digital Photography Review

Conclusion - Pros

​

• Huge 11.1x focal length range, ideal travel lens
• Decent build quality - much better than Nikon's 18-55mm kit lens
• Very effective vibration reduction system, at least 3 stops benefit
• Excellent fast, silent autofocus with manual override
• High image quality in the normal to short telephoto range, and good at 200mm

Conclusion - Cons

​

• Pronounced distortion across much of the range
• Extremely soft at 135mm
• Rather average close-up performance
• Zoom creep

 

[BXPhoto]

Yep. $400 sounds good if the lens is in good condition. Unfortunately, because of the 11x+ zoom range it is a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none lens that has some image quality issues. Whenever possible avoid using either version of the the lens from 18-35 mm, from 125 to 140 mm and from 180 mm to 200. Otherwise the lens does an OK, but only OK, job. Also don't use the lens at the near limit of it's focus limit distance for each focal length.

This review is for the older version. The optics of both versions are essentially the same. Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX review: Digital Photography Review

Conclusion - Pros

​

• Huge 11.1x focal length range, ideal travel lens
• Decent build quality - much better than Nikon's 18-55mm kit lens
• Very effective vibration reduction system, at least 3 stops benefit
• Excellent fast, silent autofocus with manual override
• High image quality in the normal to short telephoto range, and good at 200mm

Conclusion - Cons

​

• Pronounced distortion across much of the range
• Extremely soft at 135mm
• Rather average close-up performance
• Zoom creep

This is quoted for truth. Avoid multipurpose lenses. Just going over the weaknesses shows that this lens is actually only good at very few focal lengths of what it actually is made for. Why limit its uses to only small percentages of its focal lengths. Pick up a decent f/2.8 zoom and a better telephoto and the cheapo 50mm f/1.8 and you will have a much more versatile and creative lens stable at your disposal.

 

[Solarflare]

Superzooms can be a good choice if you for some reason dont want to change lenses, for example in very dusty enviroments (desert), or dont have the time to change lenses this fast (and have no second body either), but still need the range.

And yes, they all compromises. See for example: Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR II - Review / Test Report

 

[The_Traveler]

I had one.
Got some decent images but sold it because the negatives outweighed the positives.