Just Got Nikon 18-200mm Vr Lens

[skippybangkok]

Got a new lens last night ( 18-200 mm) which brings a whole new world to photography. Was initially weary of it cause could only go down to f3.5 ( most of my lenses are f2.8) ... but the VR technology is just amazing.

I have a 80-200 f2.8 lens, and at 200mm inside with no flash / hand held - forget about it. Took some test shots at 200mm with the new lens with the VR on ( image stabliization ) and it came out great.

Looks like I will be putting the 80-200 up for sale as I dont have alot of use for it ( it will out perform on sharpness and bolkeh - but there are not alot of shots I will need this extra performance for ).

Other good things is now i dont need th swap lenses any more - one lens does what i need for general holidays.

Truely a revolution.

[astral]

Wait a little.

I bought the Tamron 28/200 with the same idea, one lens for all holiday photography.

Initially with the Canon EOS620 and now the EOS 10D.

The draw back is that it takes a long time to focus.

Often going in the wrong direction before finding the right focus.

I have lost shots that way, while waiting......

Give us another update when you have had the lens for a few weeks/months.

[skippybangkok]

The Nikon has internal focusing..... its very fast and accurate. Used it today again at Dream world.... I am pretty sure will be happy with this one.

[Firefoxx]

Extreme zoom range usually results in high f-stop. That's why you can have something like a Canon 70-200mm IS F/2.8 (Canon's miracle lens), but you have to have F/3.5 when the wide angle reaches 18mm. I have a EF70-300mm IS F/4-5.6, and it's great (since I rarely use a tripod), but it doesn't perform miracles. Still need enough light for hand-held extreme 300mm shots.

If you want IS in everything, go for the Minolta line that Sony has picked up. The IS is in the body. However, the lens pricing (even without IS in the lens) is a bit high, and the system is not as popular as Canon/Nikon.

[tigerbeer]

skippy?? how much did you pay for the lens???? amazing range. am looking for that perfect lens which does not need changing. (makes it cheaper too)

Firefoxx, am looking for a DSLR with prices not too steep. can you suggest a good combinations of body and lenses????

[Nordlys]

Extreme zoom range usually results in high f-stop.

True. And often with quite noticeable vignetting and big distortion on both wide and tele end. I have recently bought Canon's EF24-105mm F/4L IS USM when I already have EF24-70mm F2.8L USM, whose zoom range entirely covered by the newer lens. EF24-70mm F2.8L USM doesn't have so wide zoom range and it's much heavier and bulkier (and more expensive!) than the newer lens, but I didn't trade it off for EF24-105mm F/4L IS USM. EF24-105mm F/4L IS just doesn't beat the picture quality of EF24-70mm F2.8L. From what I recently read in a magazine article this lens yields even better image quality than EF50mm F1.4 USM prime. I guess there are trade offs to just about everything.

EF24-105mm F/4L IS USM is a very versatile lens though, and IS is a very practical feature that I can freeze the image from hand shake at as slow as 1/2 second.

Edited July 19, 2006 by Nordlys

[RAZZELL]

skippy?? how much did you pay for the lens???? amazing range. am looking for that perfect lens which does not need changing. (makes it cheaper too)

Firefoxx, am looking for a DSLR with prices not too steep. can you suggest a good combinations of body and lenses????

Only one word you need to know...CANON...

[Firefoxx]

Either Canon or Nikon are good, with similar lenses and bodies. More of a matter of preference, or already owning lenses of a certain mount. I got a Canon Rebel XT (350D). Can be had for around $600 in the US with rebates. Olympus and Sony (used to be Minolta) also have DSLRs, but aren't comparable on a large scale to Nikon/Canon.

I only know about Canon lenses and bodies, so I would say a good combo body/lens is the 350D (XT), with 70-300IS USM for tele, and 17-40 f/4 for wide. $600 for body, $500 for tele, $600 for wide (guesstimates).

The new Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM seems to be *the* lens to get for 1.6 crop factor Canon DSLRs... great range, great quality, fast F/stop, and IS. The price tag is a bit steep, but people say that it's worth it. Still way out of my league.

[skippybangkok]

Lens cost 32,000baht from nikon shop in MBK. ( not the grey one ). Very happy with it, and my missus has sold most of my primes / zooms i used for land.

3.5 / 5.6 sounds low (high)at the outset, but cause the VR, it gives a far better than a 2.8 in low light. Yes, the quality of the lens might be a tad lower than i.e.the 80-200, but no having to frig around with changing lenses makes it worth it. If you are super pro with very specific goals in mind, you might for for specific lenses, but for the run of the mill stuff, i could not imagine anything better..... ( maybe a future 10.5 - 600 )

[Firefoxx]

That's why there are so many different lenses to choose... it's up to the photographer to pick whatever suits him. On the one hand you have ultra wide-range zooms that have high F-stops, which means that you sacrifice a bit of quality for versatility. On the other hand you have ultra-sharp primes, which give excellent image quality, but severely limit the photographer's options. There are also plenty of lenses in between.

For me, I'm a "candid" or "street" photographer. I take pictures spontaneously, and need lots of range at my fingertips. I also don't carry around a tripod, so IS helps a lot. My subjects are fleeting, so actually getting a shot (capturing the moment) is of more concern than image quality.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have landscape photographers who have a fixed subject (landscapes), and can ponder and evaluate their framing at leisure. They carry huge tripods, and want the best quality possible. They can carry around various primes, and IS would be of no use.

[skippybangkok]

That's why there are so many different lenses to choose... it's up to the photographer to pick whatever suits him. On the one hand you have ultra wide-range zooms that have high F-stops, which means that you sacrifice a bit of quality for versatility. On the other hand you have ultra-sharp primes, which give excellent image quality, but severely limit the photographer's options. There are also plenty of lenses in between.

For me, I'm a "candid" or "street" photographer. I take pictures spontaneously, and need lots of range at my fingertips. I also don't carry around a tripod, so IS helps a lot. My subjects are fleeting, so actually getting a shot (capturing the moment) is of more concern than image quality.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have landscape photographers who have a fixed subject (landscapes), and can ponder and evaluate their framing at leisure. They carry huge tripods, and want the best quality possible. They can carry around various primes, and IS would be of no use.

Sums it up well. For underwater, I use the 105mm for macro, 2x TC if want to do very small stuff ( i.e. Pygmy seahorses ) , and am in the market for a 10.5 for wide. These 2 are primes, and have a specific purpose. I am typically on the 105.

On land, I am a bit of a snappy shooter, and changing primes or changing zooms is annoying, and I dont need 100% glass to be happy.

18-200mm is about all I will ever need. Have not tried it yet with the 2x TC. (Kenko ). Wont need it much though.

[astral]

I came across a 50-500mm zoom in the local shop.

I think it fitted the canon range.

F4 -6.3 which soundded very reasonable for such along zoom range

[The Skipper]

How do you like the lens?

I'm thinking of the D80 with that lens.

Opinions?

[skippybangkok]

Never used the 50-500 ( contemplated it ).

I use the 18mm part of my lens frequently, and is well suited to closed environments ( parties / hotels ). 50 is a bit in the high side.

From my experience of the 80-200 2.8 without VR, you will be challenged by the 500. either need full sunshine, or high ISO or a tripod.

Again, as some one else said, its horses for corses really. Depending on what u like to shoot, it maybe suitable. If ur into static wilde life, maybe good, but at the f-stops given, will not be easy to get fuzzy back ground which can make a bird picture stand out well ( normall about 2.8 gives great effect)

If there was a 18-400 VR with good lens quality, i might think about that one, but for the time being the 18-200 suits me very well. (sold all my zooms and primes except what i use underwater (105 and 10.5 )

[ourmanflint]

I'v had my 80-200 f2.8 VR for a few months now, and you just don't realise how good VR is until you try it, and whats worse get used to it. I'm constantly having to remind myself that I can't get away things such as slow shutter speeds on my other lenses. I would love the 105mm VR Macro, but have been told it doesn't use VR at close range... bizarre really.

[skippybangkok]

On land I want good shots, but not going for the cream of the crop ( try underwater, but never suceed ), and the 18-200 is great ( not more lens changes ).

Saw the 105 VR, I have the old 105 for underwater. VR would be useless cause for macro shots we shoot with powerfull strobes, and turn the F stop to get good depth. Hand held macro on land with out flash might need VR to get the appropriate fstop.

[pnustedt]

Skippy - does the lens cause a shadow when using the camera internal flash? I have this problem with a Sigma 10-20 when I forget to attach external.

[skippybangkok]

Cant remember , as i normally use the external flash. But wil try for u

[astral]

Skippy - does the lens cause a shadow when using the camera internal flash? I have this problem with a Sigma 10-20 when I forget to attach external.

Slightly off topic.

The canon 10D has that problem with a large lens and the internal flash.

They cured the problem on the 20D and 30D by making the flash extend higher.

[skippybangkok]

Tried it this morning, and its generally ok ( for snappy snappy stuff ) . Light distribution looks relatively even. Would go for a proper flash though if you want good shots .

[pnustedt]

Would go for a proper flash though if you want good shots .

Tks Skippy. I've got an SB-800 Speedlight but I thought the beauty of the lens would be that I could carry the camera with just the lens and rarely need to change it - thus avoiding the need to cart a kit bag around.

Sounds like a great lens at a reasonable price - hope you get great shots and tks again!

[skippybangkok]

Cool... well, i did want to sound pretentious ( hoever to spell that ). Yes, got the SB -800, and quite frankly if use it alot during the day for fill flash. gets rid of shadows and can put subject (i.e.mrs in shadow, and "paint" her with the flash instead of harsh sun light).

Internall flash works ok, but of course it would not compare to the SB. Further more, I think the VR is power hungry ( not verified yet), and flash and VR lens would drain batt. quick.

[jimbobkk]

pnustedt. I notice quite significant lens shadow when using the 18-200mm on my D200 especially at the wide angles. Definitely would recommend using the SB-800.

Also, while the 18-200mm is a great all-round travel lens don't expect the sharpest photos from it. Don't get me wrong, I love this lens but it is still not quite up to the level of say the 70-200mm vr.

[skippybangkok]

Well, its a bit like the 4WD from Porche..... its not a real 4WD, and its not a super speed porsche as we normally know.

I does not require a stretch of the imagination to conclude that the 70-200 would be sharper. I had the 80-200 non VR (2.8), and it was glass wise far superior than the 18-200.

Point is, I got sick of changing lenses, wife got sick of me fiddling around too.Sure, if you want the sharpest of the sharpest, go for the primes, or narrower zooms.... fully agreed.

Edited October 10, 2006 by skippybangkok

[Pui]

This is a a delicate lens. Theres a drop test on ken rockwell site that suggests its quite strong fro a plastic lens.

I had mine for 4 month and it falied. it wasn't dropped. One day the zoom felt stiff. Then it locked up. I tried to work it lose and something just snapped inside.

I bought it in Hong Kong so had to take it back there. Its got an international warrently butI didn't fancy trying to hold Nikon Thailand to this.

Besides i g ot oHong Kong quite a lot anyway.

Just be careful with this lens its not pro build quality.

[DaKen]

I use a D80 and 18-200 VR. I used it at the Bangkok St. Andrew's society children's highland games on Saturday, you can see the results at Bangkokscot.com. I like it because the optics are very good it has lightning fast fovcusing and VR11 seems to work well. I bought mine at Panbtip Plaza for 24,000 Baht. Got an international guarantee and registered its serial no with Nikon. Is it grey, who knows but I am very please with the results. I recomend this lens to any Nikon Digital SLR users.

[skippybangkok]

This is a a delicate lens. Theres a drop test on ken rockwell site that suggests its quite strong fro a plastic lens.

I had mine for 4 month and it falied. it wasn't dropped. One day the zoom felt stiff. Then it locked up. I tried to work it lose and something just snapped inside.

I bought it in Hong Kong so had to take it back there. Its got an international warrently butI didn't fancy trying to hold Nikon Thailand to this.

Besides i g ot oHong Kong quite a lot anyway.

Just be careful with this lens its not pro build quality.

Strongly recommend not to drop a lens or camera.

I love the lens, and have only 3. This one for on land, the 105 mm + 2x tele convertor for underwater, and the 10.5 which is my darling for underwater wide angles. Here is a CFWA of a nudi branch using the 10.5. Shot at about 10-15 meters depth, dome port was almost touching the Nudi ( few cm to spare) but u can still see the diver up above ). Alot of back scatter, but it was a test shot to see what the lens could do.

Edited October 2, 2007 by skippybangkok

[PETDCAT]

I bought this lens in America back in April just before coming to Thailand. I used it for a week or two with no problems. On the last day of Songkran the front lens fell out. I was very carefull with this lens and treated it like a baby. When I shipped it back to USA for warranty repair, Nikon informed me it wasn't covered because the lens was dropped and mistreated. I never dropped the lens and was furious that Nikon would not honor their warranty. Well after 2 weeks of emails and phone calls they finally relented and sent me a new lens. The original was a refurbished lens and it was replaced with a refurbished lens. So far the only problem I have with this lens is remembering to turn off the VR when using a tripod.

cheers

Bill