nikkor 18-200mm vs 35mm + 70-300mm???

[Charliedelta]

Considering that with the discounts that come with buying lenses with a new camera, it would cost pretty much the same (when bought with a d7100), which would you choose, the nikkor 18-200 alone or the 35mm f/1.8 with the 70-300? Why? Would the image quality improve enough to justify the loss of range on the wide side?

 

[manaheim]

Ouch. I'd bet you that overall that 35mm and the 70-300 are going to be overall better quality than the 18-200... but that's kind of a weird gap in the ranges there, so I might be inclined to tell you go 18-200 and just be careful with it from 18-35 and 150-200. It gets a bit wonky.

 

[CaptainNapalm]

I have all three of these lenses and can tell you that none of these combinations are superior to the other, it all depends on what you want to do with your gear. It really is a tough call. The 18-200 is an excellent lens and produces fantastic images. Contrary to what many complain about, I don't really see a notable difference in image quality between this lens and my 70-300. The true benefits of the 18-200 is the fact that you can keep this lens on all the time (so no lens swapping) and you get a relatively wide angle on the 18mm end. It's also a decent build quality lens and not too large or heavy. The benefits of the 70-300 + 35mm combo are you get substantially more reach and better low light performance with the 35mm f/1.8. The 35mm will also produce ever so slightly better quality images than the zooms. The obvious draw backs of this combo is the constant lens swapping and the lack of wider angles. Personally for me, if I were making this choice, I'd stick to the 18-200 simply because I like to shoot wider more often. Bottom line, you can't go wrong with either, so ask yourself what you shoot most and how you shoot and make your decision from there.

 

[manaheim]

Captain, that 18-200 has some SERIOUS quality issues at the extreme ends. So bad that I noticed when I was far less picky than I am these days.

 

[CaptainNapalm]

Captain, that 18-200 has some SERIOUS quality issues at the extreme ends. So bad that I noticed when I was far less picky than I am these days.

That's so interesting. I have to admit that I'm relatively picky when it comes to IQ and I've read much complaints about the IQ on the 18-200 on the net. So I decided it's not a lens I want to buy. Then I received this lens for free from my wife's father and was totally surprised to not notice any IQ issues. I specifically expected these issues but have found this lens to be good at all focal lengths, perhaps just a very slight lack of sharpness at the 200mm range. Also, I know it's not just my poor judgement because I was able to notice IQ differences among other lenses, just I always found my copy of this lens performing well. So I don't know what's going on, maybe I'm just lucky with my copy.

 

[CaptainNapalm]

OP you should also note the 70-300 is compatible with FX format cameras, should you ever wish to switch to full frame, as is the 35mm (I think). The 18-200 will likely be throw away if you switch to FX. Something to think about.

 

[manaheim]

Captain, that 18-200 has some SERIOUS quality issues at the extreme ends. So bad that I noticed when I was far less picky than I am these days.

That's so interesting. I have to admit that I'm relatively picky when it comes to IQ and I've read much complaints about the IQ on the 18-200 on the net. So I decided it's not a lens I want to buy. Then I received this lens for free from my wife's father and was totally surprised to not notice any IQ issues. I specifically expected these issues but have found this lens to be good at all focal lengths, perhaps just a very slight lack of sharpness at the 200mm range. Also, I know it's not just my poor judgement because I was able to notice IQ differences among other lenses, just I always found my copy of this lens performing well. So I don't know what's going on, maybe I'm just lucky with my copy.

Do you have the VR or the VR2? I had the VR.

 

[CaptainNapalm]

Captain, that 18-200 has some SERIOUS quality issues at the extreme ends. So bad that I noticed when I was far less picky than I am these days.

That's so interesting. I have to admit that I'm relatively picky when it comes to IQ and I've read much complaints about the IQ on the 18-200 on the net. So I decided it's not a lens I want to buy. Then I received this lens for free from my wife's father and was totally surprised to not notice any IQ issues. I specifically expected these issues but have found this lens to be good at all focal lengths, perhaps just a very slight lack of sharpness at the 200mm range. Also, I know it's not just my poor judgement because I was able to notice IQ differences among other lenses, just I always found my copy of this lens performing well. So I don't know what's going on, maybe I'm just lucky with my copy.

Do you have the VR or the VR2? I had the VR.

I think it's the VR. I don't have the box or paper work to check but looking online it shows the VR as having a red VR logo on the lens and the VRII as having a silver logo. So checking my lens here it has the VR written in red, so I conclude it's not the VRII, which makes sense since her dad apparently had this lens for quite a few years.

 

[manaheim]

Maybe yours was blessed.

Or mine... cursed.

The latter is possibly more likely.

Though I do see many reports of complaints.

 

[CaptainNapalm]

Maybe yours was blessed.

Or mine... cursed.

The latter is possibly more likely.


Though I do see many reports of complaints.

I thought about this before and concluded that I must have gotten a good copy and that there are many bad ones floating around because, like you, many people complain about this lens. I guess for the OP if they choose this route it would be wise to test out the specific copy of the lens they're going to buy before committing to the purchase, or at least buy it from a place that offers refunds.

 

[greybeard]

Apples and Oranges

 

[The_Traveler]

I'm not a pixel peeper but I used my 18-200 for a year or so and then sold it.
A decent set would be the 35, the 50 and the 70-300.
I've used the version one of the 70-300 for 4 years and while it is marginally less good than the 70-200 2.8. the weight and price differential makes it work.

 

[bc_steve]

I would go with the 35mm and the 70-300. I have those lenses and I am quite happy with them. 300mm vs. 200mm is a big advantage and when you are using the 35mm you will probably like how small and light it is vs. the 18-200. The main reason I'd go with the two lenses as opposed to the 18-200 is the image quality. You can't beat a prime, and the 70-300 is probably the best telephoto that won't cost you an arm and a leg.

CaptainNapalm, the 35mm lens is a DX lens.

 

[TheLost]

First... Make sure you are talking about the 70-300VR not the crappy 70-300 non-vr..

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR = good
Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G AF = bad

Second.. There is no difference optically between the 18-200 VR1 and the VR2... only the VR system changed.

The 18-200 is a good general-do-everything lens. The 35mm prime and 70-300VR will be sharper.

It will come down to what you want to shoot:
Vacations, Kids running around, Pets and general day-to-day stuff.... 18-200mm
Sports (indoor & out), wildlife, portraits... 35mm & 70-300VR

For me... i use 2 lenses more then any others. My 50mm 1.8G and my 70-200 f/2.8.

 

[gregtallica]

It will come down to what you want to shoot:
Vacations, Kids running around, Pets and general day-to-day stuff.... 18-200mm
Sports (indoor & out), wildlife, portraits... 35mm & 70-300VR

This is the exact answer.


I have the 35mm and the 18-200. Quality on the 200 sometimes is a little iffy. I don't have trained eyes, don't pixel peep, don't even shoot way way often... but the sharpness on my 35 is so much nicer than the zoom, and the zoom at the long and short ends is just... "ehhh." Lots of distortion on the 18 end. 200 end loses contrast and color, in my opinion. I am actually considering selling/trading my 18-200 for the 70-300, but I also have acess to an 18-55 when I need that range.