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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 11, 2009, 12:35 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
gregg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 264
Default

so, I went through this thread curious as to what what your final decision and thoughts on the lens were?

By the way, I saw a used sigma 18-200mm OS for $300 on Craigslist...on a tight budget, I offered him $190, not really expecting anything...a week later he emailed me back accepting my offer. I got very lucky.

On my D40...at 400iso outdoors in the Florida sunshine, you can easily shoot at f9-f22 which does sharpen things up. I'm sure the same would apply to the nikon lens as well.


gregg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 3, 2009, 1:13 AM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10
Default What about weight??

I do not know how much your other lenses weigh but the Nikon 18-200mm weighs 1.25 lb. Your earlier posts sounded like you might have small hands - this may be a heavier lens than you might expect. I have the 18-200 on my D300 so the camera is heavier than the D40 you have, but I a male with average hands and was surprised at the weight of the lens. This is probably because I had stopped using my film SLR for the last few years in favor of light weight digital cameras (not DSLRs). I am now used to the weight of the D300/18-200mm but they are heavy - something to consider when traveling overseas.
rocketcam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 30, 2009, 9:51 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

I bought the 18-200mm VR lens as a kit with my D200. I had the D40 and used it quite a bit then. I will re-purchase a D40 and will most likely leave it on. On a side note the 1/500 sync speed with flash is the main reason I am buying this camera again. The use of this lens coupled with the D40 and SB400 makes for a very good traveling set-up. Outdoor shots in bright sun will yield good results in people shots sans the dreaded "racoon eyes".

I have read the comments on the distortion and softness. I don't find it as prevalent as some have experienced. The SB400 is not underpowered as I have read and use it regularly with my D200. Only downside is it does not allow the FP high speed sync. Thus, the re-purchase of the D40.

Back the the 18-200mm VR. There is a downside to the size of the lens when taking wide angle indoor shots with flash. The front end being so large will leave a dark semi-circle at the bottom of your pictures. Using the inboard flash that is.

What it really comes down to is what you want and what is out there to fill your need within your personal budget. I prefer primes for specific type shots that don't require swapping lenses back and forth. The 18-200mm VR is at a better price than it was at first. For the range it has and the convenience it does a nice job.
vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 30, 2009, 5:05 PM   #14
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

I've had two friends who are Nikon shooters who have had the 18-200 VR, I can't comment as I've never used it in anger however both have replaced it after wanting sharper results. I'm not sure off of the top of my head what they used at the wide end but know they both have the 70-200mm f2.8 for their long options. I'm not suggesting that you go for the 70-200 however just to say there are ways of getting sharper results with the trade off of convenience.

I personally wouldn't want to spend all that money as you have the range covered already with your two lenses. You could put the money to far better use IMHO, at the end of the day you are only looking at one use of this lens so that is quite a premium.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 30, 2009, 5:15 PM   #15
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gregg View Post
so, I went through this thread curious as to what what your final decision and thoughts on the lens were?

By the way, I saw a used sigma 18-200mm OS for $300 on Craigslist...on a tight budget, I offered him $190, not really expecting anything...a week later he emailed me back accepting my offer. I got very lucky.

On my D40...at 400iso outdoors in the Florida sunshine, you can easily shoot at f9-f22 which does sharpen things up. I'm sure the same would apply to the nikon lens as well.
This will work fine in some situations but if you are a creative shooter who likes to work with a more shallow DOF then it is not an option. Also stopping down to f22 or even f16 is actually past the optimum for a crop camera. If seems that f11 is close to optimum.

Check this article out http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...ffraction.html
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2009, 2:44 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 109
Default

I had a friend who wanted to buy the D5000. You can get it with the 18-55 and 55-200 lens for a decent price. However if he purchased the 27-200 lens it would cost $300 more. He did not have the money to go that far so he decided on purchasing the D60 with the 27-200 lens. He wanted conveinance with one lens more than the better camera which he feels does not take better photos if you stick with 4x6 and 5x7 prints.

Update: The price difference at B&H for the D60 and D5000 with the 27-200 lens was only $100. So he opted for the D5000 with the two lens option to keep his cost in the $1,000 range.

Last edited by Blueberry; Jul 7, 2009 at 4:53 PM.
Blueberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2009, 3:36 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
gregg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 264
Default

interesting article mark, thanks

I do agree the sweet spot is F11 on that lens.....although anything between f11 and f16 looks about the same and F7-f10 looks good with sometimes just a little softness in the corners at full pixel peeping

I believe to get the best use of that sigma lens on a d40....IMHO...you need to change the settings as that lens will otherwise it be a bit warm.....1a....s-rgb and contrast to +1

(the factory default IIIa...which can sometimes blow out or inflate the whites too much on that lens)

gregg
gregg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2009, 6:41 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark1616 View Post
I've had two friends who are Nikon shooters who have had the 18-200 VR, I can't comment as I've never used it in anger however both have replaced it after wanting sharper results. I'm not sure off of the top of my head what they used at the wide end but know they both have the 70-200mm f2.8 for their long options. I'm not suggesting that you go for the 70-200 however just to say there are ways of getting sharper results with the trade off of convenience.

I personally wouldn't want to spend all that money as you have the range covered already with your two lenses. You could put the money to far better use IMHO, at the end of the day you are only looking at one use of this lens so that is quite a premium.
I read through this thread to see the consensus of opinion and here I concur completely. Soft issues, out of focus issues - it ruined a shoot for me. My idea was to use it on the old D70 to save weight over the D3 but I've sold the body and lens and just use the D3 and 24/70. Never a bad result with these. No, the first Nikon lens I've been disappointed with in nearly 30 years.
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2009, 9:27 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Well, I have an interesting experience to share with you. I own a Nikkor 18-200mm lens. When mounted on my D-40 it was an OK lens, but no great shakes.

I have since, upgraded to the Nikon D-5000 camera, (which arrived today) and when I mounted the Nikkor 18-200mm lens on the D-5000, it was like a night and day difference. The lens is needle sharp and right on the mark. I was amazed and my opinion of the Nikkor 18-200mm lens changed immediately. So IMO the performance of that lens has a great deal to do with what Nikon camera you mount it on!

Today I love the Nikkor 18-200mm lens. One week ago I viewed it as a so-so lens. Wow! what a difference.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2009, 1:54 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
gregg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 264
Default

the d5000 has been called a d90-lite since it uses the same sensor as it's + one thousand dollar counterpart

although the d5000 still requires lenses with a motor if you want it to focus it in automatic....

it makes me wonder what my sigma would do on either camera
gregg is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 4:01 PM.