YEAH thumbs up for this if low on cash go for the without vr version!much much cheaper
Should I sell my other lens to get Nikon 18-200mm??
- Thread starter hobbes187
- Start date
- Status
YEAH thumbs up for this if low on cash go for the without vr version!much much cheaper
justinlau92
New Member
Hmmm, i may not be a pro but i heard there is some distortion at around 18mm and 200mm, the ends of the lens.
I think this is good advice... I dont really bear to let go of my 17-50mm also.... Ideally I want them both :devil:
There will be no end to this discussion, which is also a good thing I suppose. :bsmilie:
You should just borrow it and use it for a while to see if this lens does anything for you.
Then you can answer for yourself the following:
Does the distortion at 18mm or 200mm really matters?
Do you need the extra reach?
Do you really need f2.8 all the time with clean high ISOs nowadays?
Is it sharp enough for you?
What does VR allow you to do?
Can you get perfect handheld 200mm shots at 1/15 or 1/20?
I had lenses going from 10mm to 400mm but if I cannot afford to miss a split-scecond shot with an unpredicable focal length, there is only 1 lens that can do the job.
But if you have all the time in the world, I would recommend prime lenses instead.
You should just borrow it and use it for a while to see if this lens does anything for you.
Then you can answer for yourself the following:
Does the distortion at 18mm or 200mm really matters?
Do you need the extra reach?
Do you really need f2.8 all the time with clean high ISOs nowadays?
Is it sharp enough for you?
What does VR allow you to do?
Can you get perfect handheld 200mm shots at 1/15 or 1/20?
I had lenses going from 10mm to 400mm but if I cannot afford to miss a split-scecond shot with an unpredicable focal length, there is only 1 lens that can do the job.
But if you have all the time in the world, I would recommend prime lenses instead.I will be renting one for my trip to washington next week. I will also bring along my Tamron. With the number of museums (low light!) in DC, I should be able to have a good feel of how the 2 lens will perform side by side.
I'd reccomend on selling the 18-135 and keeping the rest. No point losing a f2.8 for a longer reach...
Get a longer zoom to cover the range from 70 onwards (70-200 if you have the dough, 70-300VR if you don't...)Can also consider the 80-200
I'd go with this option as well.. So there's no option for me to vote.. ;p
zac08
Senior Member
It's a lazy man's lens... one size fit all. But at the expense of certain picture quality.
Which in the end you will still sell the 18-200 to get a better lens. :sticktong
It's so versatile that I don't think I will ever sell mine for a better lens. If need be, I'll just buy a better lens, but not at the expense of the 18-200. ;p
Which means bigger, heavier, more expensive plus I'll need a FX body... I'd stick with 18-200 if I'm travelling light.. ;p Maybe I might get a D40/X body just to go with the lens, the high ISO is better than my D70s.. That would make a good combination for travelling.. ;p
To me, If I want light... I would prefer a 50mm Prime anytime. Range is not everything. To me, image quality is a lot more impt.
geraldkhoo
Senior Member
I concur... sell the 18-135 and get the 18-200. The Tamron 17-50 lens is a good lens, and this would work much better than the 18-200 in low light conditions (unless if you have maybe a 50mm f/1.8).
Each lens is different, and has its pros and cons. If there is a 18-200mm f/2.8, I would get it, but then I would have to have muscles like the man in the mocca.com advert to use it. The kind of lens to buy is determined by the kind of shots you take.
So many views, really headache. :bsmilie:
Here is mine.
Personally, I will keep the Tamron 17-50 and the 50mm.
I will sell the 18-135 and get a Nikon 55-200VR.
The 55-200VR will give you that extra reach when you need them,
while your 17-50 and 50mm will enable you to shoot in low light condition while indoor.
The only problem is you need to switch lens.
If that is a hassle to you, sell all and just get the Nikon 18-200VR for convenience.
Here is mine.
Personally, I will keep the Tamron 17-50 and the 50mm.
I will sell the 18-135 and get a Nikon 55-200VR.
The 55-200VR will give you that extra reach when you need them,
while your 17-50 and 50mm will enable you to shoot in low light condition while indoor.
The only problem is you need to switch lens.
If that is a hassle to you, sell all and just get the Nikon 18-200VR for convenience.
I strongly agree.
Look at the pro a nd cons;
Know your need and budget;
Follow your heart and just do it.
For me the VR feature nails it. Aperture 2.8 good but VR with low light situations, you can get away with 1/5 sec hand held at focus length 50 mm. Try that with your 17-50 mm F2.8, you would need support or a tripod. Sell the 18-135 mm and 50 mm.
The D300 kit lens package come with 18-200. Compare the other kit lens mounting with the one on the 18-200, I am sure you would find out that it is less of a 'kit lens'.
The D300 kit lens package come with 18-200. Compare the other kit lens mounting with the one on the 18-200, I am sure you would find out that it is less of a 'kit lens'.
- Status
Similar threads
