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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 2, 2009, 4:09 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default Help

thinking of getting a nikon system, either the D90 or D300
but i am stuck between the 18-105 lens and the 18-200 lens,
is there a big differecnce in quality between the two especially between the 18-105 range

Dave
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 2, 2009, 4:32 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd probably lean towards the 18-105mm from what I can see of the blur index charts in the reviews at slrgear.com (the corner/edge sharpness appears to be much better with the 18-105mm at some focal lengths when using wider apertures). If you click on the Blur Index for each lens and use the focal length slider, you'll see what I mean.

Nikon 18-105mm VR Review

Nikon 18-200mm VR Review
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 5:28 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
I'd probably lean towards the 18-105mm from what I can see of the blur index charts in the reviews at slrgear.com (the corner/edge sharpness appears to be much better with the 18-105mm at some focal lengths when using wider apertures). If you click on the Blur Index for each lens and use the focal length slider, you'll see what I mean.

Nikon 18-105mm VR Review

Nikon 18-200mm VR Review
well i saw thru photozone the difference in quality,
use to own a minolta 24-105 in film days, and was pleased. but i ask my self would i miss the 105-200 range for norma,l every day, family, vacation shooting.

Dave
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 5:50 PM   #4
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

I've not shot with either to any large extent as I'm a Canon shooter but have a couple of friends who had D300/18-200 combos and both replaced this lens after a while as they wanted better quality.

If I were spending out on a D300 then I wouldn't put a lens that is such a compromise on it. Yes there are advantages with the zoom range which I would consider if I wasn't spending out on a Semi Pro body but not otherwise.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 6:43 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark1616 View Post
I've not shot with either to any large extent as I'm a Canon shooter but have a couple of friends who had D300/18-200 combos and both replaced this lens after a while as they wanted better quality.

If I were spending out on a D300 then I wouldn't put a lens that is such a compromise on it. Yes there are advantages with the zoom range which I would consider if I wasn't spending out on a Semi Pro body but not otherwise.
what if i copuled it with the D90 body

Dave
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 7:03 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Dave:

What is it that you are finding lacking in your K20D and existing lenses? I know at one time AF speed was giving you problems.

The 16-50mm f/2.8 you have is a pretty good quality lens for center sharpness from what I can tell. I noticed you mentioned going with a Sigma 18-250mm OS lens recently.

Well... when you go with a lens with that much focal range from wide to long, there are going to be some optical compromises. The Nikon 18-200mm is probably a bit better. But, it's still not *that* good, depending on what you are looking for in your images, viewing/print sizes needed, etc. If I really wanted to stick with a single body/lens combo, a Nikon body with a Nikkor 18-200mm wouldn't be a bad choice in comparison to similar alternatives. But, it's not going to be as good as higher quality lenses with a less ambitious focal range from wide to long.

The lenses may not have anything to do with your issues, either. I just want to make sure you're not going to switch systems, and spend a lot of money to end up where you are now, depending on what kind of issues you're having.

You may also want to consider posting some samples of images you think a new system could help with. Depending on what's wrong, new equipment may not be the answer (especially if you go with lenses that have the same type of issues as something like that Sigma 18-250mm I noticed you mention).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 7:51 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
Dave:

What is it that you are finding lacking in your K20D and existing lenses? I know at one time AF speed was giving you problems.

The 16-50mm f/2.8 you have is a pretty good quality lens for center sharpness from what I can tell. I noticed you mentioned going with a Sigma 18-250mm OS lens recently.

Well... when you go with a lens with that much focal range from wide to long, there are going to be some optical compromises. The Nikon 18-200mm is probably a bit better. But, it's still not *that* good, depending on what you are looking for in your images, viewing/print sizes needed, etc. If I really wanted to stick with a single body/lens combo, a Nikon body with a Nikkor 18-200mm wouldn't be a bad choice in comparison to similar alternatives. But, it's not going to be as good as higher quality lenses with a less ambitious focal range from wide to long.

The lenses may not have anything to do with your issues, either. I just want to make sure you're not going to switch systems, and spend a lot of money to end up where you are now, depending on what kind of issues you're having.

You may also want to consider posting some samples of images you think a new system could help with. Depending on what's wrong, new equipment may not be the answer (especially if you go with lenses that have the same type of issues as something like that Sigma 18-250mm I noticed you mention).

i knew i could have counted on you, to carry this further
first of all
- i hate switching lenses, this is why i was considering the sigma 18-250, and was willing to accept some loss in image quality vs having a lens on the camera that has the wrong focal length.
- i was even thinking of getting the sigma 30/1.4 for when those low light situations rises.
- i got an offer on the K20D with grip, 16-50, 50-135, 360 flash , that i could not refuse
- so being in a position to start over, i was looking at the K7 with the sigma 18-250 and sigma 30/1.4
And i asked myself, you got back every cent you invested, and you are going to start over.
Not sure if it is marketing, but was always told Nikon is more reliable, dependable, and durable.
Also every time i come up to the U.S.A all i see on shelves is Nikon or Canon, which means that i can try out something and if i like it i can buy it. and not take a guess over the net
Yes i had some issues with Pentax, and i am sure i will have some issues with Nikon.
But the million dollar question is, i have the money to start over, should i put Pentax over Nikon or visecversa.

Dave
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 8:08 PM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

OK...

Well... That's a tough call (starting over or not). As some people like to say... the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Or, to put it another way, the grass can be brown on both sides of the fence. ;-)

There's no one perfect choice in a camera and lens, and each user will have preferences for one system over another. For example, I like my Sony A700. But, I'm quite accustomed to it.

The Nikons are decent cameras and if you really want an "all in one" type of lens so you have more flexibility (given some compromises in IQ), the Nikkor 18-200mm isn't a bad choice compared to similar alternatives.

I'm not sure if all newer Nikon dSLR models share this feature (perhaps one of our Nikon users know and can chime in). But, the D300 even has automatic correction for CA in it's image processing pipeline when shooting jpeg. So, you won't have a big problem with purple fringing using something like the 18-200mm like you might see using a similar lens with a different camera system.

Personally, I'd go with a different lens if I didn't really need a lens with that much range from wide to long (and I have spent some time using a Nikkor 18-200mm). But, most of the time, I'm just shooting people at closer distances. So, I really don't use longer focal lengths very much. As that type of lens goes, it's really not bad in most areas (color, contrast, flare resistance, etc.). But, you may want something a bit sharper away from center at some focal lengths, depending on what you're shooting. That's one reason I'd lean towards the 18-105mm instead.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 8:24 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
OK...

Well... That's a tough call (starting over or not). As some people like to say... the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Or, to put it another way, the grass can be brown on both sides of the fence. ;-)

There's no one perfect choice in a camera and lens, and each user will have preferences for one system over another. For example, I like my Sony A700. But, I'm quite accustomed to it.

The Nikons are decent cameras and if you really want an "all in one" type of lens so you have more flexibility (given some compromises in IQ), the Nikkor 18-200mm isn't a bad choice compared to similar alternatives.

I'm not sure if all newer Nikon dSLR models share this feature (perhaps one of our Nikon users know and can chime in). But, the D300 even has automatic correction for CA in it's image processing pipeline when shooting jpeg. So, you won't have a big problem with purple fringing using something like the 18-200mm like you might see using a similar lens with a different camera system.

Personally, I'd go with a different lens if I didn't really need a lens with that much range from wide to long (and I have spent some time using a Nikkor 18-200mm). But, most of the time, I'm just shooting people at closer distances. So, I really don't use longer focal lengths very much. As that type of lens goes, it's really not bad in most areas (color, contrast, flare resistance, etc.). But, you may want something a bit sharper away from center at some focal lengths, depending on what you're shooting. That's one reason I'd lean towards the 18-105mm instead.
Thanks again, other than the grass being greener, i like to look at a glass that is half empty
one of the main reasons i was looking at the D300 was actually for its bigger size , so it can fit in my biggish hands, ( a grip though actually makes it too big )
as with age, my hands are not as steady as before and with the Pentax 50-135 @ 135 thru the viewfinder i could have seen the lens moving all over the place, this is why in an earlier post, i was wondering if i would miss the 105-200 range, and go with the 18-105 , which apparently is the lens that caught my attencion in the first place, coupled with the 35/1.8 for low light situtations

Dave
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2009, 8:33 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

The 18-200 is very good for what it is....a superzoom. Yes there are some issues (distortion being one). I just got a D5000 to walk around with, and will be using the 18-200 on it. For my D300, I stick to better glass as I use that body semi professionally , and the 18-200 has too many compromises. If you're only going to buy one lens, then the 18-200 is a good buy. But the truth is you can do better at every focal length that lens covers.
rjseeney 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 1:44 PM.