How many of you own a AF-S VR 18-200mm ?

[perspective]

Image quality is decent. Versatile lens but I cannot accept the lens creep so it is the first DX lens I sold last year as part of the overall "FX migration" plan.

If I have to use a DX body again, I would take the 16-85mmVR instaed. Adequate range and image quality is better.

 

[Blur Shadow]

It is a great lens... But the price is a huge leap over the 18-105VR. If I were you, I'd let my budget constraints decide.

 

[Samie]

Ha.... That's COOL ! Yeah, ain't no space for ur own stuff after kids huh ?

Nope ... just get a bigger bag. The only problem is the weight.

 

[jtchoy]

I have it... Its a great travel lens, but barrel creep is a problem and I find it too front end heavy on my D60...

I use the kit 18-55 instead for everyday use. Its much lighter and well balanced on my D60...

 

[lunas]

It is a Great travel lens. VR II is also helpful for night shots without tripod.
I have one.

 

[tkbonz]

I sent my 18-200vr for maintenance recently and have to borrow a 18-135 for a kukup trip.

How I missed the VR, range, M/A mode and the solid feel of the 18-200vr when compared to the 18-135. One thing though, the 18-135 seemed to AF a bit faster than the 18-200vr.

 

[giantcanopy]

Great travelling lens for a DX body as you can shoot at a wide focal range. Gave it away and now using primes and a shorter zooms, but still miss its convenience and flexiblity.

Ryan

 

[CharlieS]

Yup,

I think for now, it's still one of the best travel lens available in the market

Pretty gtood value for money too

 

[Anson]

Anyone have any comments/example on the wide-angle distortion? Thanks.

 

[faineant]

Ultimately we all know what this lens is for and who is the target group. As many have mentioned, the convenience of this lens is unbeatable when you travel.

As such we accept some compromise in terms of image quality & barrel distortion(wide-end).

I own this and its almost a "God-send" when I am on my travels. Furthermore, the image quality is not terrible, it's decent enough.

As for more information, there is a heap of information on the web. Visit dpreview, cameralabs, photozone.de, thomas hogans website, kenrockwell etc. for reviews and sample images of the lens. You can find barrel distortion samples in those websites as well.

I have to say it is for now the best "superzoom". The Tamron 18-270 has the benefit of range but a slower focusing mechanism and no internal focusing(which is quite inconvenient if you ask me) I made the mistake of thinking the Tamron 18-270 was better than this till I tried it out and was disappointed with the lack of internal focusing.(If you touch the focus ring while lens is on autofocus it will damage the lens focusing mechanism).

Just to add, if you shoot NEF(RAW) photos, I think most of the distortion can be corrected. I always take photos in NEF(RAW) format.

More importantly; Comparing this lens with Nikkor pro-grade lenses is taking this lens out of its turf. One should be comparing it with Sigma & Tamron 18-XXX range or the like. This lens is in a certain category that only has Sigma 18-200/Tamron 18-200/250/270 & Canon 18-200(if you must compare with this one) as suitable and fair comparisons.


My opinion: This lens is for someone who is looking for an all-in-one lens for Travel. If you want a walkabout lens I think other shorter ranges with higher image quality would suffice. I would recommend this as an all-in-one travel lens; there is simply no better alternative.

 

[hohoho32]

i'm not the picky kind of person and after using this lense for over 1/2 a year, i dun find any problems or visible distortion at wide angle. but then again.. i also use a sigma 10-20. heh.

 

[crusher]

Anyone have any comments/example on the wide-angle distortion? Thanks.

Bad, and it is not easily corrected as it is very uneven.

 

[lsisaxon]

wth better iso nowadays

18-200 is becoming a better and better lense

however... do bare in mind that it produces horrible bokeh

i had it for awhile. bought and sold it.

still i agree tat this lense is worth it when comparing "quality + price + 18-200mm range + VR"

Agree with the horrible bokeh part. I saw the reviews for Tamron 18-270 in DPReview and I think other than the slower focusing as mentioned by faineant earlier, it might be better all round as it claims to be sharper than Canon at wide end and sharper at Nikon at the tele end, getting 70mm more which is quite significant enough.

Plus, the Nikon 18-200VR might be potentially unreliable....

 

[D70new]

Specially bought this len for travelling overseas for Holiday.
Light weight and cover wide to zoom.
Photo turn out decent.

 

[MSZ006Zeta]

It's good in terms of it's range and compact size (for it's range). But it's like a 'jack of all trades, but master of none'. It's image quality is decent, but not fantastic like prime lenses. The AF is also rather slow IMO. Also, it's only real 'tack sharp' at around f/11 IMO.

But if you travel (overseas) often, then this would make a good lens. When you're travelling overseas, the less gear you travel with, the better it is. Trust me, you dun wanna lug around 5kg of camera equipment and switch lenses to capture different pictures. That is if you're travelling on tour. If you're travelling free and easy, specially to do photography, then bring as much equipment as you wish. ;p

 

[NickSampras]

Still my fav lens so far and occasionally switched to 50mm f1.8 prime lens for better quality.. Heard all the raves abt 17-55mm 'wedding' lens and also the 24-70mm lens too and intended to get 1 soon!!!

 

[JacePhoto]

Anyone have any comments/example on the wide-angle distortion? Thanks.

Not much distortion ah. at 18 mm, its distortion free. I use the 10-20 mm and have now changed to use the 18-200 at 18 mm so that i wont distort anything.

i'm not the picky kind of person and after using this lense for over 1/2 a year, i dun find any problems or visible distortion at wide angle. but then again.. i also use a sigma 10-20. heh.

Same here.

 

[crusher]

Not much distortion ah. at 18 mm, its distortion free. I use the 10-20 mm and have now changed to use the 18-200 at 18 mm so that i wont distort anything.

Distortion free? Look at the horizon of the image below, notice the distortion on the right side and left are different? Note that this is one the "best" among all my attempts, other pictures exhibit even worse distortion. My advice is, if you like to shoot landscape, don't use this lens. Those who say it is good probably only use it to shoot people or animal.

 

[dawgbyte77]

I got 1 too but doesn't use it as often. I hate the "drooping" action when my cam hangs on my neck. This is just inconvenient and sometimes embarassing when I suddenly find I got an "erection". But frustrating when shooting something on the ground or trying to do some "macro" vertically, and find that it is out of focus because of the droop. Since I don't use the zoom much, I normally use sigma 18-50 F2.8 more often. Photo quality, its not that bad.

 

[lsisaxon]

I got 1 too but doesn't use it as often. I hate the "drooping" action when my cam hangs on my neck. This is just inconvenient and sometimes embarassing when I suddenly find I got an "erection". But frustrating when shooting something on the ground or trying to do some "macro" vertically, and find that it is out of focus because of the droop. Since I don't use the zoom much, I normally use sigma 18-50 F2.8 more often. Photo quality, its not that bad.

Zoom back to 18mm when not in use and you should not have this problem.