Why you would NOT buy the AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED


Status
Not open for further replies.
espn said:
That one is also Nikon SG one lor :bsmilie:

nikon sg allows you to gaffer thier cam? ;p dun bluff!
 

rebbot said:
nikon sg allows you to gaffer thier cam? ;p dun bluff!
he is being responsible for their equipments! wahahaha! :bsmilie:
 

Beachboy said:
yes it used to be nikon SG but it sold to your liau :bsmilie:
Since when they sold it to me? :bigeyes: :bigeyes:
 

rebbot said:
nikon sg allows you to gaffer thier cam? ;p dun bluff!
Why not... :dunno: You never do it before doesn't mean don't have mah :nono:
 

espn said:
Told you that one is Nikon SG one lor :bsmilie:

now i am wundering if you have a AFS 500 f4 and AFS VR 300 f2.8 :p
 

espn said:
Why not... :dunno: You never do it before doesn't mean don't have mah :nono:

:sticktong when the new nsc open, I go ask them ~
 

rebbot said:
now i am wundering if you have a AFS 500 f4 and AFS VR 300 f2.8 :p
That I also confirm don't... it's not even on my list to buy :bsmilie:
 

rebbot said:
:sticktong when the new nsc open, I go ask them ~
Go lor :sticktong
 

Can we stick to the originator's question? I had to scroll down 2 pages of off-thread ego-polishing to realise there was no relevant talk on the original thread. pls chatter on your own separate thread, I'm more interested in the original thread question.
 

singlish said:
Can we stick to the originator's question? I had to scroll down 2 pages of off-thread ego-polishing to realise there was no relevant talk on the original thread. pls chatter on your own separate thread, I'm more interested in the original thread question.

actually if u read, the question has been answered in post 2 and 4 more or less. It all boils down to image quality. If you can accept it, then all is well. If you cannot, then so be it.
 

I'd reply the opposite. Weight and size. I use to own 28-200mm (just sold it recently to anticipate this). It is not very sharp compared to my 80-200mm but the latter is long and weight 1KG so the 28-200, even if not sharp, is still one of my favorite. With the improved sharpness and VR of 18-200mm, its a must-have for me. It is also less scandalous when shooting among my friends who are used to exislim or panasonic fx7 and for travel or vacation, I only need this lens.
 

rebbot said:
actually if u read, the question has been answered in post 2 and 4 more or less. It all boils down to image quality. If you can accept it, then all is well. If you cannot, then so be it.
Actually I'd prefer to term it as "individual preference" too many and too often tends to buy based on people's remarks, and without knowing if it suits them. :D
 

espn said:
Actually I'd prefer to term it as "individual preference" too many and too often tends to buy based on people's remarks, and without knowing if it suits them. :D

that's true :) like I said if you can accept it then all is well. The best is to go down to the show with your cam body. Shoot and review on the spot or review it on your comp at home.
 

rebbot said:
that's true :) like I said if you can accept it then all is well. The best is to go down to the show with your cam body. Shoot and review on the spot or review it on your comp at home.
That's why, there's not much in replies... because even if I push the 18-200 down to hell, you like it so much, you still will buy it :D
 

singlish said:
Can we stick to the originator's question? I had to scroll down 2 pages of off-thread ego-polishing to realise there was no relevant talk on the original thread. pls chatter on your own separate thread, I'm more interested in the original thread question.
its up to personal requirement, to me i find that this lens is more convenience to use for travel purpose..

as rebbot said it been answer many times already :)
 

Beachboy said:
its up to personal requirement, to me i find that this lens is more convenience to use for travel purpose..

as rebbot said it been answer many times already :)
Frankly, I won't bring the glass for travelling... but it's good for those who won't want to lug too many equipment(s).

If I want image quality, I'd stick with the 17-35 and 70-200VR :D
 

Caomhin said:
Hi CSers,
Looking for the downsides to this lens...
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
Pricewise and performance wise

Thanks for sharing.

Then don't buy.....each camera manufacturer has cheap and expensive lens.

Why keep looking on the downside? If you love and have passion in photography, any lens in the market will do justice. Each lens has it's ups and downside.

A 18mm is a wide angle for landscapes for greater coverage.

In between is for........countless things you can think of to shoot

A 200mm is a telephoto for sports for unreachable shots.

Combine them you have the best of both worlds but due to the construction of the lens, the aperture is being sacrifice for a smaller f-stop.

Actually there is no end to explaining about it......either you buy it and use it to it's fullest capacity. If not, just get a 50mm(cheapest and best lens) and learn the hard way.

Explaining to you about 80-200, 28-200 and so on is going to be very long winded. Go do a search under newbie forum and you will get plenty of answers about zoom lenses.
 

Caomhin said:
Hi CSers,
Looking for the downsides to this lens...
AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
Pricewise and performance wise

Thanks for sharing.

not so wide
not so tele
not so cheap
not so solid
not so sharp
not so VR, VRII is new but not mean better than VR, since the same VR technology may not be applied from wide to tele all the time. so VRII introduced

after buying, need to clear some your old stuffs, very troublesome
a good compact size gitzo tripod will make all your lens to be VR III ;p and the cost with a small ball header will be less
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top