|
User Lens Reviews Nikon 18-200mm f3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX IF-ED
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
A Necessity for Me, Monday, 01 March 2010
It was an excellent choice, but the 18-55mm kit lens, while a good lens in it's own right, just didn't have the flexibility necessary to get the shots I need and frequently changing out lenses is just not an option. Almost every professional reviewer has lauded this lens, while noting its compromises, so I bought it even though it was a stretch for my monthly budget. I have no regrets. For someone who used an image-stabilized, super-zoom point and shoot, the D3000 and this lens is the perfect upgrade. I can see that eventually I will want a wider lens for special purposes, but until that time comes, this is the perfect choice. I need a lens that can do it all and do it well. I agree that the lens-creep issue is a problem, but it is a manageable one. When I'm not shooting, I lock the lens, even though at 18mm the lens doesn't creep yet. When I bring the camera up for a shot, the lock is easy to switch off with my left thumb, so it's just one small adjustment among many I've had to make to accommodate a more complex and more capable camera. I would say to those new to dSLRs, buy whatever Nikon camera body you like and get this lens at the same time. Yeah, it's not cheap, but it's a lens that will more than meet your needs until you become a more sophisticated shooter and beyond.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Shoddy workmanship, Monday, 01 March 2010
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Zoom is a little loose, Tuesday, 09 February 2010
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Great for beginners and if you only had one lens, Thursday, 21 January 2010
I got it and could not be happier. 18-200mm fast, take it with me everywhere. It sat on my D40 then my D200 Then as a photographer I began to grow. I wanted faster lenses, Prime lenses, etc. Since then this lens has sat in my bag I got a feel for how I like my pictures to be taken and what I needed was something faster. If i wanted zoom I wanted something further. Also since i will be moving up to the FX body soon this lens will be useless since it is a DX lens. As a customer decide if what you plan on doing is moving up in photography and taking it to another level, or being happy with prosumer DSLRs with DX lenses. If it is the latter, get this lens Otherwise invest in fx lenses that will grow with you and this expensive hobby
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
The best Nikon lens, Wednesday, 20 January 2010
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
a versatile lens, but...., Tuesday, 12 January 2010
Auto-focus is fast and good. If I have problems, it's largely with the auto-focus algorithm in my camera body, not so much the lens. If you snap with a tri-pod, TURN OFF THE VR. I know it sounds odd, but you'll get a better photo handholding with VR-ON than you will with tri-pod VR-ON. It has to do with the VR algorithm. Essentially, algorithm assumes there's vibration-induced noise and a tri-pod essentially causes it to over-correct. Other than that, the VR is fantastic. Snaps of animals that don't pose look great. The lens does poorly in close-ups and other short/mid distances. While the center of the image is fine, the outer edges will have a gray/black bordering. You either have to adjust your zoom appropriately or crop it out. Lastly, this isn't the lens if you're trying to snap a photo as a pro-sumer. Don't get me wrong, your pictures will look fine for things like facebook or standard prints. This is NOT the lens for larger elegant wall mounted photography...
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Nikon 18-200 VR, One of Several Very Good, All Pur, Thursday, 07 January 2010
And so it goes with super zooms, these wonderful lenses that go from pretty wide to very long. If you look at the reviews of any of them, some people claim horrible results, while others scratch their heads, because they're just loving them to death. My first superzoom was a Sigma 18-200 which I got about five years ago and I was blown away with what I could do with just one lens. Plus my shots were pretty darn sharp. The lens was more expensive then, than it is now. It's still a good lens, it weighs a couple ounces less than a pound and if I only could have been satisfied, I'd have saved a bundle of money. Ah well. Anyway, I had an opportunity to try out the Tamron 18-200 as well back then, but I decided on the Sigma. It was a coin toss. At the time I thought both lenses would be good general, all purpose, walkabout lenses. They wouldn't be as sharp or fast as primes and wouldn't be as light as shorter zooms, but heck, one lens which went all the way from 18 to 200mm (okay 27 to 350mm in the real world), such a deal. Both lenses were five star lenses as far as I was concerned, both still are, because they are what they are, a very good compromise. If you're expecting a lens that will reach out across a dark night and grab a shot of lovers making out by the beach, then you don't want these lenses, but if you're looking for a good general walkabout lens, both will suit you and they won't break your bank. But they don't have image stabilization and when Sigma came out with it, I had to have it. So I shelved the Sigma zoom I had, (thankfully I didn't sell it) and bought the Sigma 18-200 OS and Sigma's Optical Stabilizer worked great. I got sharper handheld shots in lower light, but they came at a price, almost half a pound. It doesn't sound like much, eight ounces (7.6 to be exact), but try carrying it around on your shoulder all day long. I really noticed the difference, especially when I was shooting. I probably wouldn't have gone to that auction site with my fairly new lens, if it hadn't been for Tamron. They came out with their Tamron 18-250 and I had to have it. A bigger reach, the heck with image stabilization. Not only could I go all the way from 27 to 375mm in the real world, but I got back a bit over six ounces, the lens was lighter. So now I had two super zooms, which was good, because I go out people shooting with my sister a lot. So one would think I'd be satisfied, but when the Nikon 18-200 came out, well Nikon optics in a superzoom. I had to have it, so the Tamron went up for auction (because I just loved the Sigma, even though it didn't reach as far). The Nikon lens focused faster, but not that much faster then the other two, had image stabilization and was faster at the long end and it took great shots, but it weighed more than the other lenses, coming in at a whopping 20 ounces and it was creepy, creepy, creepy and with no zoom lock. The other lenses had almost no zoom creep and they had a zoom lock, which I never used. Very annoying the zoom creep was, still, great shots from a great lens. Satisfied, well for awhile, then came 2008 and the Tamron 18-270 with their VC version of image stabilization and up for auction went my expensive Nikkor lens. Yeah, I still hung on the my first super zoom, the Sigma. For sure the Nikkor was a five star lens, but a girl can't justify more than two super zooms at any one time. The Tamron lens actually weighed a fraction less than the Nikkor it replaced. It was a bit slower on the long end, was a bit stiff in the zooming, but easy to get used to and almost no, sometimes no, zoom creep and it has a lock. It's just simply one heck of a lens. Sometimes it's a bit slow to autofocus in lowlight, but still I think it finds its focus faster than I would, but not as fast as the Nikkor. I should add here that Nikon has upgraded their 18-200 adding a zoom lock. I've played with one and not only have they added that zoom lock, but it doesn't seem to creep nearly as much, but that could just be the copy I used. I should also mention that Sigma has come out with their Sigma 18-250 OS which I was lucky enough to use for a month. That is just one super fine lens. It focuses fast and I think it finds its focus better in low light than the Tamron 18-270. Also this new Sigma has a super quiet motor, though I've never really been bothered by the sound of a focusing lens. By reading other reviews of these lenses, I've learned that they are all subject to zoom creep, so I suppose in the main, I've been lucky. All of these lenses are very good, at least all of the copies I've used. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend any of them. However, if you go with Nikon, you're going to be paying an awful lot more. You get a slightly faster lens on the long end and you get Nikon quality, but Sigma and Tamron give quality as well and Tamron warranties their lenses for six years, so they're pretty confident that they're building a great product (and now they're part of Sony). So through my whole super zoom experience, which one do I wind up using the most? You guessed it, that Sigma I bought five years ago. Like the proverbial Timax, "It takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'." If the day is bright and I'm going people shooting it's the one I put on my camera, because it's light and it's images are true.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
So convenient for travel, Sunday, 27 December 2009
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Nikon 18-200mm Lens, Saturday, 21 November 2009
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Nikon 18-200 DX VR, Thursday, 12 November 2009
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Great lens, Sunday, 01 November 2009
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Good for what it was designed to do, Sunday, 18 October 2009
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Nothing but a plesure, Thursday, 08 October 2009
My impression is that it is the lens as the lens should be. For people like me it is a dream come true. Anything "simpler" than this lens is just a waste of money.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Excellent quality and highly usable, Monday, 28 September 2009
This is a dynamite camera! I base that conclusion on several thousand pictures taken with the D90. I'm not going to take readers' time reciting all the features and specs that have been more than amply discussed in other reviews and in the online photographic literature. Instead, I will review a few practical considerations that often are omitted by others. 1. The camera feels good in the hand. It is heavy enough to be stable yet not so heavy that it becomes a burden in a long day of shooting. The grip works well for large hands like mine as well as the small hands of my nieces and nephews. And the 3" LCD on the back is gorgeous. These tend to be sniffed at by experienced SLR users but I've learned to love it. 2. The camera is easy to use--for a DSLR. Like any serious camera, it requires study and practice to master the controls so that one can access the desired functions quickly. This is NOT a P&S and probably is not the best choice for the technologically inept although there is an auto function for beginners that will produce perfectly fine snapshots. More importantly, as the learner progresses, or for the experienced photographer, there are a very large number of readily accessible settings that have been described at length by others. The bottom line is that some excellent human engineering has gone into making the D90 just about as functionally efficient as any DSLR in the market. 3. The build quality is excellent. To be sure, it has a plastic body over a magnesium chassis but the materials are solid and the fit and finish are very nicely done. Nothing, with the possible exception of the door for access to the SDHC card, is lightweight, fragile, or flimsy. Durability and reliability should not be issues unless one is going to take thousands of pictures under adverse weather or rough handling conditions. I have noticed a number of experienced professionals using the D90, usually as secondary but sometimes as primary. 4. The D90 is far more capable than most of the owners who will use it--including me! An individual who really needs more image/camera control than the D90 provides is very likely a pro who will choose a much more expensive model, anyway. In other words, don't worry about outgrowing the camera; you won't. 5. I don't do video so I offer no personal opinions here except to note that within another year or so HD video will probably be available on virtually all DSLRs. I understand that the video capabilities of the D90 are kludgy in some respects, particularly with regard to the lack of autofocus, but I'll leave that for others to discuss. 6. This is the question I'm asked most often: "I have a (D60, D70, Digital Rebel, EOS-whatsit, or you-fill-in). Should I trade it for the D90?" If pride of possession is important, and you can't afford a pro model, then yes. If you are a technogeek who loves to tinker with camera controls, decide whether the new ones on the D90 are a lot more exciting than on your existing camera. If the twiddle factor is high, then yes. If you are unsatisfied with the quality of your pictures then ask yourself the hard question: Is the problem with me or with the camera? As Ken Rockwell has said ad infinitum, the photographer makes the great image, not the camera. If you have the skills and truly are inhibited by the limitations of your current camera, then yes. If the bottom line is cockpit trouble, then no, grow into what you have before you move on. At any given price point, Nikon DSLRs have only one serious competitor, Canon. All the others are basically also-rans. That is just a personal opinion so please don't write nasty comments about how dare I say that. Are Nikons better than Canons or vice versa? Frankly, I don't think there is enough difference in quality to worry about for two seconds. When I hear or read passionate advocacy for one brand over the other, I tend to suspect testosterone deficiency. Try both; choose the one you like better. Just keep in mind that as you accumulate glass it is going to become more and more expensive to change from one to the other. If you select the D90, I think you'll be thrilled with it. I am...and I'm pretty hard to thrill.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Nikon delivers., Sunday, 20 September 2009
I shoot a lot of sports for my clients, and being on the side-lines for a soccer game when the players are 10 feet in front of you one second and 100 feet away the next can be a nightmare. Without this lens I would have missed so many shots. The only downside to lens is that it is a little slow in low light. After-all, this an all in one lens, and for Nikon to have made this a constant f/2.8 the lens would have been three times the size and price. My recommendation is to have the Nikon 35mm f1.8 DX in your bag as well... that is the ultimate DX set-up. Those two lenses on DX bodies... you will never need any other gear because after that getting good photos is all about your skill. One last note, if you're worried about lens creep, don't be. It's not a problem. It only happens if you leave your lens zoomed passed 70mm, point the camera straight down, and shake it. Which is something you shouldn't be doing anyways because it is a dangerous way to walk around with your camera! Always keep your camera stored properly and walk around full zoomed out!
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
Results 1 - 15 of 357
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
News | Forum | Lens Reviews | Teleconverter Reviews | About Us | Contact Us | Glossary | How To Lens News | Lens List | © 2008 Lens-reviews.com |