Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Geoffc" data-source="post: 59339" data-attributes="member: 8705">Westmill got me thinking about the 18-70 3.5-4.5 lens as he rates it highly. On that basis this might get me shot <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite9" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!    :eek:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":eek:" /> I have an 18-70 from my D70 which my daughter had borrowed until recently so I decided to compare it with my 18-200 VRII lens at 18mm, 35mm and 70mm all at wide open and F8. I took all the shots on a tripod with cable release at ISO 200 using my D300s (VR off on the 18-200). I know these things are somewhat subjective, but I would say the 18-200 had the edge everytime, not massively, but enough that I won't be swapping the 18-200 for the 18-70 for any of my shots. The only thing the 18-70 did have was a slight speed advantage.I will own up to being a fan of the 18-200 since it came out, but I kind of hoped the 18-70 would be my cheap secret prime for certain focal lengths.  I hope this is balanced as I know how the 18-200 compares to my 70-200VRII and the IQ of the latter is in another league, but then again so is the price and the fact that I wouldn't want it on the camera all through my holidays due to its size.I haven't compared my wife's VRI 18-200 but I would say we are always pleased with the results and I suspect the glass is the same so it shouldn't matter with VR off. When I read of people not being happy with the 18-200 IQ I do wonder if it's the way they are using it as we get consistently good results and if I could only keep one of my lenses, it would be that one. I'd better stop there in case I sound like a Nikon salesman <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite9" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!    :eek:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":eek:" /></blockquote>

Verification