Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 13, 2007, 9:12 PM   #1
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93

Hello, I just reveived some money as a gift and I want to purchase one of these two lenses. I had a demonstration of the he 105 macro VR and I was amazed by the quality of the photo. I was told I can also use it as a 105mm prime. I kinda like to do macros. On the other hand, I am used to wide angle to telephoto since I almost exclusively use a Sigma 18-125 on my D50. I can achieve good results with the Sigma but I think there is some quality this lens cannot achieve. So that's why I'm also looking for the Nikkor 18-200 VRII. Who has experience with the 105mm and with the 18-200? Thanks for the input.

Germain, D50, Sigma 18-125, Nikkor 50mm 1.8.
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 14, 2007, 11:33 AM   #2
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71

I choose 105mmVR over the 18-200mm basically and purely because I hate the creep issue with the 18-200mmVR. If you have not tried it please feel free to do so. By all means there are a couple that works perfectly! And the best way to gurantee that is buying it from the shop and seeing it first hand that is all good. Creep means the lens will auto zoom out when you point down or you point up it zooms in. Too bad for me as I do use Tripod work and this will become very iritating.

If you intend an all round lens 18-200mmVR has been raved about scream shout, you name it, best of the best. But in cases when you do decide to switch to better performance in low lighting 18-200mmVR becomes not as good performers as 17-35mm or 17-55mm and 70-200mmVR F2.8. A line has to be drawn on what you expect and what you want from a lens. Naturally the Pro stuff is more costly, sharper pictures across the stops and faster focusing as well, not to mention heavier and better quality built.

If I am someone who is never going to look into Pro stuff then forget what I am saying here and just grab the 18-200mmVR.

the 105mmVR as you know is not a light lens. well constructed, low distortion as it is a prime compare to 18-200mmVR which is known to be one of the worse candidates in distortion. The 105mmVR is also a very nice potrait lens, some would say too sharp but it can be soften with a filter. The Macro feature is excellent, I find it to be very sharp and the VR helps in getting close ups of insects before they fly off.

However one should also know that Sigma 150mm is very nice indeed for Macro and so is the Tamron 90mm, I have seen great results with these as well. I bought the 105mmVR basically I know if I ever need to get a cheap D40, it will be compatible, plus the solid quality built lens is just so satisfying making me feel nice that I paid that much for a great lens which doesnt have much issues.

I held back on the 18-200mmVR is because of the creep, and plus I already had 18-135mm which performs pretty good except no VR but I have a tripod. I bought a 70-300mmVR and was happy with that lens as well.

Is a hard decision if you dont have a wide angle currently. But I have heard some prefered results on 18-70mm compared to 18-200mmVR.
nexusworks is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:30 AM.