Nikon 18-200mm VS Nikon D80 kit 18-135mm
- Thread starter nagase4
- Start date
- Status
whether it is worth it is really up to your usage. the main advantage of the 18-200 is the additional reach from 135-200 and VR. Optically, the 18-200 is not that great, but if you don't scrutinize your photos, you should have no problems.
So... is it worth paying $600 more for the reach and VR? It is like asking if it is worth paying $1k+ more for the VR for the 70-200 as compared to the 80-200... its up to you bro!
Just a personal preference, I'd rather get the new 16-85 VR :thumbsup:
I just got the 18-200... imho, i think 18-200 is a must-have for travelling as you basically can dont bring any lens.
For me, i intend to bring my 12-24 tokina and my 50mm 1.8 nikon and thats about it. Maybe a small flash if i feels like bringing.
For me, i intend to bring my 12-24 tokina and my 50mm 1.8 nikon and thats about it. Maybe a small flash if i feels like bringing.
The price for the VR and the slightly increased range.
It is one of my staple traveling lens including the 50/1.4 and a 12-24 as well.
Ryan
It is one of my staple traveling lens including the 50/1.4 and a 12-24 as well.
Ryan
18-200 u can hardly get missed shots for events and random street photography.
The VR is very good (and supposedly able to snap at 4 stops of light lower).
I have just used this lens to shoot a conference.
So to me i think it is worth it.
On the other hand, i also have a 50/1.8
Now also intend to get fisheye lens
The VR is very good (and supposedly able to snap at 4 stops of light lower).
I have just used this lens to shoot a conference.
So to me i think it is worth it.
On the other hand, i also have a 50/1.8
Now also intend to get fisheye lens
i was using the kit lens 18-135mm & changed to 18-200mmVR after 4 months of using D80. My main reason is the VR, which offers a lot of flexibility during travel photography. I felt it is worth investing the extra $, as this very versatile lens will still useful even if you upgrade camera body later. BTW, i bought a new set instead of the used one.
i dun think it's a must-have... people can go travelling with 3x compact pns cameras... it's just a convienent lens that's all. if size and wt is an issue, then might as well leave the DSLR and it's gear at home,bring a compact /prosumer instead.
However imho u bring a DSLR out it's cos u wan to come back with better pics...
The VR and extra reach is a good-to-have but as some bros here pointed out VR is not a do-it-all and u can use ur "walking zoom" to go nearer to the subject...
Thus it all depends on wat u wan and how u wan to shoot + wat u wan to get...
Getting a bit confusing..
Heh.. of course nothing in life is really a "MUST HAVE" la! However, if you ask any travel photographer, for the price, weight, convenience, range and quality, u will be hard press to find something better. If you are into pure photography trip, by all means bring all the primes or the AFS f2.8 lenses as they will give you the better photo quality. The price: by switching around, u probably missed the shot, esp for candids. Not to mention the weight issue..i dun think it's a must-have... people can go travelling with 3x compact pns cameras... it's just a convienent lens that's all. if size and wt is an issue, then might as well leave the DSLR and it's gear at home,bring a compact /prosumer instead.
However imho u bring a DSLR out it's cos u wan to come back with better pics...
The VR and extra reach is a good-to-have but as some bros here pointed out VR is not a do-it-all and u can use ur "walking zoom" to go nearer to the subject...
Thus it all depends on wat u wan and how u wan to shoot + wat u wan to get...
Getting a bit confusing..
p.s. i do use a simple olympus p&s for underwater and street photography, also let my wife shoot whatever she wants!
"is the $600 difference really worth it?"
What is worth? I personally feel that it's rather subjective when coming to define what is worth.
Do you need/want it? If yes, it's worth every cent you have. If not, don't even bother about it.
To those who has purchased the 18-200mm, at the point of buying, they feel that it's worth it, as simple as that. If you don't need the VR and the additional of 65mm... it's not worth it. ;p
What is worth? I personally feel that it's rather subjective when coming to define what is worth.
Do you need/want it? If yes, it's worth every cent you have. If not, don't even bother about it.
To those who has purchased the 18-200mm, at the point of buying, they feel that it's worth it, as simple as that. If you don't need the VR and the additional of 65mm... it's not worth it. ;p
hmm.. i've got a question here.
i'm currently using a 18-135mm kit lens. so if i buy a 18-200mm, does it mean that my previous lens is totally redundant?
i'm currently using a 18-135mm kit lens. so if i buy a 18-200mm, does it mean that my previous lens is totally redundant?
Sounds like it :dunno: Unless u found a secondary use for the overlapped focal length.
I stopped using mine when i got the 18-200mm VR
Ryan
so what did u do to urs after u got ur 18-200mm VR?
sold it off? or keep it for memorial sake? haha..
The 18-135 is still a lighter lens, so for the times you want to carry 175g lighter, you can opt to use the 18-135.. Then again, what's 175g? ;p
I will sell it off and get a 50mm f1.8 or f1.4 if u can afford or get a 12-24mm
As others have pointed out "worth" is a relative term. However, you really aren't comparing apples with apples here. The 18-200mm VR lens is made to a somewhat higher standard (and you pay for it). You will notice that when you actually use it. If you can handle the bit of extra weight you will never touch your 18-135mm again.
The last i compared, the 18-200mm IQ paled compared to the 18-135mm actually.
Perhaps better built.
Ryan
the 18-135mm is plastic mount compared to the 18-200mm with metal mount, thats why is lighter.
lens with vr built in also tend to be heavier as well.
Try to have someone help to buy from HK.
For 18-200 Nikon is around S$1000 [with NIkon HK warranty]
Cheers
For 18-200 Nikon is around S$1000 [with NIkon HK warranty]
Cheers
In my experience that hasn't been true. Had the 18-135mm and the 18-200mm and, in my personal experience, have to say that the 18-200mm gives much better pictures. The lens is sharp, contrasty and gives beautiful pictures at pretty much all focal lengths. Sure there is some distortion or pincushioning at extremes and zooms will never have the IQ that primes do, but overall I wouldn't pick any other lens, in terms of diversity, over the 18-200mm. The shots below were taken with the 18-200mm lens, and it seems to do pretty well.
- Status
Similar threads
