Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
Opinions on the Nikon Nikkor AF-S 18-200mm F/3.5-5.6 VR DX ED G Lens
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stmv" data-source="post: 80278" data-attributes="member: 10038"><p>I have owned two copies of this lens. One I dropped at a museum, and replaced. I did fix the broken one, so,, don't automatically throw a broken lens away. Typically, the cost to fix is about 1/3 the price of the orginal. </p><p></p><p>I found the 18-200 to be the practical lens. Took lots of nice shots with the lens, and as long as one is not rough, can expect decent life. </p><p></p><p>Definitely more convenient to have the one lens. almost makes the SLR a point and shoot. </p><p></p><p>for casual shooters who don't want to be bothered taking on and off lens, I recommend this lens. </p><p></p><p>Maybe the 18-300 is even a better choice, but would have to tradeoff size to extended range. </p><p></p><p>My wife uses my 18-200 lens on my old D80. On my D7000, I use the 18-55 and the 55-300 as my casual walkaround camera. I find newest 18-55 to be sharper then the 18-200, and the 55-300 to have better reach, with no sacrifice of quality over the 18-200. I bought the 18-55 for like 140 dollars, and a gray market versio of the 55-300 for 250 dollars, so really low investment. cheaper then the 18-200, and I really like the smaller form factor of the 18-55 over the 18-200, and switch to the longer zoom when needed (wear it with a lens pouch on the belt).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stmv, post: 80278, member: 10038"] I have owned two copies of this lens. One I dropped at a museum, and replaced. I did fix the broken one, so,, don't automatically throw a broken lens away. Typically, the cost to fix is about 1/3 the price of the orginal. I found the 18-200 to be the practical lens. Took lots of nice shots with the lens, and as long as one is not rough, can expect decent life. Definitely more convenient to have the one lens. almost makes the SLR a point and shoot. for casual shooters who don't want to be bothered taking on and off lens, I recommend this lens. Maybe the 18-300 is even a better choice, but would have to tradeoff size to extended range. My wife uses my 18-200 lens on my old D80. On my D7000, I use the 18-55 and the 55-300 as my casual walkaround camera. I find newest 18-55 to be sharper then the 18-200, and the 55-300 to have better reach, with no sacrifice of quality over the 18-200. I bought the 18-55 for like 140 dollars, and a gray market versio of the 55-300 for 250 dollars, so really low investment. cheaper then the 18-200, and I really like the smaller form factor of the 18-55 over the 18-200, and switch to the longer zoom when needed (wear it with a lens pouch on the belt). [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
Opinions on the Nikon Nikkor AF-S 18-200mm F/3.5-5.6 VR DX ED G Lens
Top