filters for a 18-200

[dafiryde]

i am considering getting a uv and a c/polarizer filter for my Nikon 18-200.
not too long ago, i bought the same filters for my pentax system, the filters were the hoya pro 1 digital series. my problem is that not only is it gonna cost $270., but i was having serious focus issues, and when i took them off, the issues were gone. now that i have the Nikon system, would it create new problems,
degrade the IQ
should i just bank the $270, and if lhe lens gets damaged, at least i would have $270 to put up for the new lens

Dave

[TCav]

72mm is a large filter. A circular ploarizing filter will cause some vignetting at the wide end even if you do get a thin filter, but you may not notice it anyway since that lens vignettes just fine all by itself.

A reasonably good UV filter would be ok, but it would need to be a thin filter too.

I'd just save my money, keep the lens hood on, and hope for the best.

[dafiryde]

Originally Posted by TCav

72mm is a large filter. A circular ploarizing filter will cause some vignetting at the wide end even if you do get a thin filter, but you may not notice it anyway since that lens vignettes just fine all by itself.

A reasonably good UV filter would be ok, but it would need to be a thin filter too.

I'd just save my money, keep the lens hood on, and hope for the best.

that sounds like good advice
will save that money

is there a particular reason why Nikon did not include VR on their 2.8 premium lenses

Dave

[TCav]

Originally Posted by dafiryde

is there a particular reason why Nikon did not include VR on their 2.8 premium lenses

Seperate subject, but ...

Optical image stabilization requires a new lens design. Large apertures require a large stabilization mechanism. Nikon has done it for some, but not for all. I think Nikon has some desire to get commonly used lenses to be AF-S and VR, and they're doing more popular lens designs first. Adding VR to an f/2.8 lens will be difficult and expensive, which will often price it out of reach of the common schlub like you and me. Well, maybe not you.

I'm anxiously awaiting some test reports on Tamron's 17-50/2.8 VC or Sigma's 18-50/2.8.4.5 OS. So far, these are the only fast stabilized standard zooms available.

[dafiryde]

Originally Posted by TCav

Seperate subject, but ...

Optical image stabilization requires a new lens design. Large apertures require a large stabilization mechanism. Nikon has done it for some, but not for all. I think Nikon has some desire to get commonly used lenses to be AF-S and VR, and they're doing more popular lens designs first. Adding VR to an f/2.8 lens will be difficult and expensive, which will often price it out of reach of the common schlub like you and me. Well, maybe not you.

I'm anxiously awaiting some test reports on Tamron's 17-50/2.8 VC or Sigma's 18-50/2.8.4.5 OS. So far, these are the only fast stabilized standard zooms available.

i have had my eye on the Tamron 17-50/2.8 VC for some time now. so far it sounds good
still juggling to match it up with the Nikon 70-300 VC
for me VC is a must

Dave

[TCav]

Me too.

I had the Tamron 17-50/2.8 on my KM5D and had no complaints. Now that I shoot Nikon, I miss having a fast standard zoom that's stabilized. I'd like to get the VC version, but I'll wait for objective test results before I take the plunge. If the Tamron doesn't pan out, I'll look real hard at the Sigma. At $300 and 2/3 stop faster than the kit lens, how could it not be a winner?

[dafiryde]

Originally Posted by TCav

Me too.

I had the Tamron 17-50/2.8 on my KM5D and had no complaints. Now that I shoot Nikon, I miss having a fast standard zoom that's stabilized. I'd like to get the VC version, but I'll wait for objective test results before I take the plunge. If the Tamron doesn't pan out, I'll look real hard at the Sigma. At $300 and 2/3 stop faster than the kit lens, how could it not be a winner?

i myself will wait it out, at least until early part of next year.
from the few reviews i have read so far, it sounds convincing, but yet from experience, that same reviewer say something different in 6 months time.

Dave