Nikon 18-200mm VR IF lens

forzaF1 · Aug 27, 2006

Does anyone have one of these yet? Wolf Camera has been telling me that there is a REALLY long waiting list for them. This would be the perfect take-everywhere lens for me when I don't need a whole lot of zoom. I would probably be using it with a D200(will buy in the near future).

Thanks for the input

-John

Tiberius · Aug 27, 2006

When you don't need a lot of zoom, the 18-55 or 18-70 is a perfect take-everywhere lens. The appeal of the 18-200 is that it has rather good optics (not as good as the 17-55 or 70-200 f/2.8, but at least as good as the 18-70), an insane amount of zoom (11x), and VR. Which is, of course, why everyone wants one. And since Nikon has to plan stocks 2-3 years in advance (how long they claim Optical Glass takes to cool), it would have been difficult for them to predict just how crazy the demand for the lens would be.

And, of course, the fact that whenever any online store gets them in stock the eBay sellers grab them all doesn't help.

PNA · Aug 27, 2006

Have you considered the 28-105???

forzaF1 · Aug 27, 2006

I have considered the 18-70mm, 18-55, and even the 28-105mm, but the 18-200mm would really suit me best. The VR would be great, too. Do you think the mad rush for these lens will be a little calmer by November/December?

Tiberius · Aug 27, 2006

I don't think the rush will calm down until every Nikon owner gets one. It's literally the greatest walk-around lens of all time for any mount yet created. There's nothing quite like it. Decent optics, reach from wide to long telephoto, all under $1000..... this lens will be a hot topic for quite a long time. When finances allow I'd like to pick one up myself.

dsp921 · Aug 28, 2006

I wouldn't recommend putting an 18-55 on the D200, probably not even the 18-70. Since you are getting a higher end camera don't skimp on the glass. Look at the 17-55 or the 28-70. The 18-200 would also be OK.

forzaF1 · Aug 28, 2006

Does anyone have any photos that they took with that lens?

JIP · Aug 29, 2006

"Don't skimp on the glass" should mean 2.8 or better especially for a D-200. IMHO 18-200 is too wide a range for a quality lens if you want a small camera why are you buying a D-200 (great choice of body by the way) .

forzaF1 · Aug 29, 2006

JIP said:
"Don't skimp on the glass" should mean 2.8 or better especially for a D-200. IMHO 18-200 is too wide a range for a quality lens if you want a small camera why are you buying a D-200 (great choice of body by the way) .

When did I say I wanted a small camera?

JIP · Aug 30, 2006

In my years of selling cameras when people want "take anywhere" they mean small and light sorry if I missinterpreted what you meant I still stand by 18-200 being too wide a range for a zoom. Popular doesn't always translate into better.

JIP · Aug 30, 2006

In my years of selling cameras when people say "take anywhere" camers they mean small and light. I apologose for misinterpreting wat you meant. I still stand by my belief that 18-200 is too wide a range for a quality zoom. I have found out that exteremly popular doesn't neccesarily translate to better.

PNA · Aug 30, 2006

JIP....

I'm planning to purchase the 18-200 exactly for that reason..."smallability".

Reading most of the reviews seems to point to outstanding performance and quality.

Help me understand you position when you say "too wide a range for a quality zoom".

I now have 28-105 and 70-210 both Nikon lenses. They're not the best, but are more than adequate for amateur plus photos. I would not think the 18-200 would be any less coming from Nikon.

Tiberius · Aug 30, 2006

JIP said:
In my years of selling cameras when people say "take anywhere" camers they mean small and light. I apologose for misinterpreting wat you meant. I still stand by my belief that 18-200 is too wide a range for a quality zoom. I have found out that exteremly popular doesn't neccesarily translate to better.

Look into the reviews. I challenge you to find a negative one. Even Rockwell, who could manage to find problems with a 50mm prime if he wanted, loves it to death.

dsp921 · Aug 30, 2006

With this lens it depends on the user how satisfied they will be with it. Image quality is good for a zoom of this range and price point. You need to understand and accept the trade-offs necessary for a large zoom range.
Bjorn Rorslett covers a lot of the Nikkor glass on his site. His reviews are very accurate from what I've seen. And he actually uses the lenses he is reviewing.
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_02.html#AFS18-200VR

JIP · Aug 30, 2006

Aquote from the previous link

"Image quality is remarkably good at the wide end and declines toward the telephoto end. This is the opposite behavior compared to mostmodern zoom Nikkors. A fair amount of light fall off into the corners of the image is seen towards the long end too"

Now I'm not one to read alot of reviews I just known this has been the case with the few reviews of any zoom with this range that I have read. I have also used these lenses (28-200etc.) while working to test the quality and I'm not a big fan. Personally it seems to me for that kind of money ($700-$800) you could get a much better piece of glass.