Two lenses or one?

Nikon Photographer

Senior Member
I would say it really depends on where your going to be shooting, if it was dusty, etc, I would stick with the one lens, I was thinking of getting the new 18-300 for my travel photography
 

eurotrash

Senior Member
I agree with the three guys above.

I also think that a multi lens setup will always yield better results than a single-lens solution. However, an all prime bag would be "ideal" for image quality, though not very flexible IMO.
 

§am

Senior Member
I think it will really depend on what you want to take pics of.
If you plan your day, then having an 18-55 and a 55-200 in your arsenal is a good option as you only then need to take one or the other with you, and maybe a prime too.

However, having a super lens like the 18-200 on holiday etc is beneficial too - only 1 lens to take and look after and worry about, and as it's more than likely attached to your camera body on a strap around your neck, then chances are it won't go walkies without your knowledge :)
The disadvantage is however, it's a heavy lens, ~1/2kg and you will be lugging that around your neck all day (or whatever part of it you have the camera in use).
The argument to that would be 2 lenses might weigh the same too, but you have a choice then as to which to use.

Another thing I noticed when I hired a 18-200 a while back is lens creep - this particular lens seems to do a fair bit of it :(

Finally, any damage to your 18-200 is costlier then say to one of your 18-55 or 55-200 lenses. I'd certainly be crying if my £500 lens went belly up, but might sob a little less if it was my £90 18-55 :p
 

Nikon Photographer

Senior Member
Another thing I noticed when I hired a 18-200 a while back is lens creep - this particular lens seems to do a fair bit of it :(

The first one released by Nikon did suffer from zoom creep, they redesigned it and put a lock on it and also upgraded the VR to VR2, but apart from that, the lens construction is the same as the original version
 
Top