> 1 <
| Author | Message |
31 Bravo
See my 36 Photos  
|
2009-02-03 GMT-5 hours 
|
|
So I've been thinking of purchasing a new lens. Currently I have a Nikon D40 with a 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 and a 55-200mm f4.5-5.6
The two i was considering were the Nikon 18-200mm VR or the 70-300mm VR. Does anyone have any experience with the 18-200mm lens? I'm split between having the extra 100mm focal length or combining both wide and tele into one lens for practicality. Just wanted to hear some of the experienced photographers opinions. |
| Author | Message |
mark_munzel
See my 952 Photos
|
2009-02-04 GMT-5 hours 
|
|
I'd definitely replace the 55-200 with the 70-300 VR, and keep the 18-55 for close stuff, family photos, etc.
Full disclosure: I don't own a 70-300, but I know people who do -- sometimes in addition to much pricer lenses. They wouldn't keep it if it wasn't good value. HTH, -M.M. P.S. If the gap between 55 and 70 bothers you, replace the 18-55 with a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4. 
|
| Author | Message |
31 Bravo
See my 36 Photos
|
2009-02-04 GMT-5 hours
|
|
I'm leaning more towards the 70-300mm as well, its also like 300$ cheaper than the other one. This one will autofocus on D40 right?
|
| Author | Message |
mark_munzel
See my 952 Photos
|
2009-02-04 GMT-5 hours
|
Quote As an AF-S lens (S = "silent wave" motor built into the lens), it should. But take a look at the lens at a local camera store to confirm that it does everything you expect. -M.M. |
| Author | Message |
lieuwehofstra
See my 2,835 Photos 
|
2009-02-05 GMT-5 hours
|
Quote I own a 18-200, it is a fun little lens if you're on holiday and want to travel light without having to change lenses. However, at 200 mm it is getting soft at apertures lower as F8, and if you start shooting brick walls you will get some soft corners at most focal lenghts. So for holiday and photo's of kids and pets I would say yes, for serious aviation photography, I'd say no. I have no experience with a 70-300 VR, only with more expensive lenses like the 300 F4 AF-S and the 200-400 VR zoom Furthermore, you might want to consider a second hand D200. It has a much faster frame rate and a respectable 10 MP sensor. |
| Author | Message |
31 Bravo
See my 36 Photos
|
2009-02-05 GMT-5 hours
|
|
I also considered a D80 or D200, or maybe even a D90, but thought it might be a better idea to invest in a lens first. I cant afford both a lens and a body at once but I've definatley looked at upgrading the body but that will have to wait for later on, advance promotion hopefully. Thanks to both of you for taking your time and helping me out.
|
| Author | Message |
lieuwehofstra
See my 2,835 Photos
|
2009-02-05 GMT-5 hours
|
Quote You're absolutely right. Good lenses will keep their value, while in 5 years the current digital bodies will be worthless and on the digital history dump |
| Author | Message |
Peter Terlouw
See my 2,207 Photos
|
2010-10-31 GMT-5 hours
|
|
definately go for the 70-300. I have had both 18-200 and 70-300 and the latter has a much better image quality. The 18-200 is nice for holiday trips but does not perform well for our hobby.
|
> 1 <