18-200mm F3.5 Nikkor OR not?

M

modemmike

Member
I know this is probably a no brainer for most of you but I'm really bouncing back and forth on this lens:

18-200mm Nikon F3.5 VR

eCost.com has it for just under $650 which is great price, it's a great lens, no doubt about it, nice range but is there maybe something better for the same budget? I don't like the other players with the same lens (Sigma, Tamron) but they are a bunch cheaper... probably plastic right? Or maybe not very good at the stabilization. I already have a 70-300mm and it's a freaking waste 90% of time and my 28-80mm is well, okay I guess so this lens seemed like the greatest thing sense sliced bread (what was the greatest thing before sliced bread anyways?).

So here is my question I guess, is F3.5 going to be enough to get those awesome Haunted Mansion shots or should I maybe just forget the pipe dream of having just one lens? I don't wanna be a Mr. Devine carrying my kids college money around in my back pack full of lenses but I do want a really good set of lenses or ideally just one and it seems to be this lens... someone push me over here, one way or the other, just put me out of my misery.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ok here i goes again, i'm a canon geek so kind of bear in mind i'm not brand familiar but the concepts are the same for the big 2

there ain't no such thing as a free lunch

means that there is no 1 lens solution, oh sure you can spend the money for a great big honkin heavy 2.8, but be advised that these are seriously expensive and ungodly heavy by noontime, and that's not in the parks in july, that's starting out at 0900 on a pleasant day, i know, i had both the 28-70 and the 80-200(aka the magic drainpipe), both big heavy black red ringed L grade canon gear, as good as it got at the time, sold them both to go lighter f4,what good is a great lens if the weight of it means it stays home or at the hotel all the time

for me the closest to the traveling light through the parks solution is the 24-105 f4 IS, great walk around lens, with the 5d low light capabilities i can handhold in some real low light, nothing i could ever do before, for those needed situations i have the tamron 28-75 f/2,8 di, a real steal and surprisingly good on the full frame sensor 5d, most of the time it's the 24-105, and the 50mm f1.4, a real low light beauty for indoor ride photos, and you still need to max out the iso, luckily the 5d has a very useable 3200, and image stabilization really is the best thing since sliced bread

keep this in mind, great glass lives on for the span of more than a couple of bodies, and we will see full frame in the prosumer bodies at half the price in our lifetimes, my guess is 5-7 years, tops

so if you can afford the vr lens, by all means get it, it'll take great pics for years, i've heard great comments about that lens on this forum and others, pair it up with a large aperture 50mm or nikon equivelant of the canon 85mm f1.8, another great low light lens, and you'll be set for a lot of creativity in the parks, and elswhere, remember large apertures are absolutely necessary for kids indoor sports, or plays/concerts, etc

your mileage may vary, but you did ask for an opinion, so you got one
 
I don't have that particular lens, so I'll let those that do have it give their opinion on quality of build, etc. But, I do know that f3.5 is not going to get you anywhere close to getting dark ride shots. You need to get down to f1.8 minimum, f1.4 would be even better. Depending on your shooting habits, this lens might cover 99% of your photography. If you want to take dark ride shots, you can find fast primes used on ebay and KEH pretty cheap and in good condition.

I personally carry the 12-24mm DX, the 28-70mm F2.8 and the 70-200mm VR. I need lenses with very little distortion for the architectural photography that I do, so I need both the 12-24 and the 28-70 for that reason. If it weren't for that, I'd probably take a serious look at the 18-200mm.

I also think that its best to stick with lenses made by the same maker as your camera body if you intend to keep the lens for a long time. I think in most cases that the build quality is much better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"modemmike" said:
Uhg, back to bag of lenses then...

Maybe this lens the?
Click to expand...

That's certainly a possibility. I shot with a 50mm and found it too short at times. Maybe Tim will make some recommendations on lenses.

I wouldn't say that you have to carry a bag of lenses. If you get the 18-200, you could get away with 2. Maybe 3 if you want both a 50mm and an 85mm, but you could leave those in the room when you don't plan to shoot dark rides. I usually only shoot dark rides when the lines were short during extra magic hours, so I left the extra lenses in the room the rest of the day.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well I could leave them at home being that I'm just few minutes away LOL but I was just hoping for a lens that could handle 99% of everything which the 18-200 can BUT not when the subject is moving or when you are moving such is the case with dark rides. I've seen the 50mm f1.8 for about $100 so the 18-200mm combined with 55mm f1.8 should do the trick... sure wish Ritz took trade ins!
 
You may want to look at keh.com then Mike. They'll buy your stuff back and depending on the situation, may also give a discount on a purchase made at the same time. You're not that far away from them compared to others here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mike, I love my 18-200 Vr. I know ScottWDW likes his too.
It does work at least 90% of the time. The last two trips I used almost exclusively.
It is not anywhere near fast enough for dark rides or night parades, but for everything else it works perfectly. Almost all my digital photos have been taken with this lens.
It is very light and small and easy to carry.
Dont forget that the f2.8 pro lens cost at least two to three times more and weigh more.
 
Michael,

I have that 50mm f1.8 lens in my backpack. It's one of the lenses I picked up after I dropped and broke my kit lens.

I used it to get the photos of Space Ship Earth that I was most proud of. Unfortunately, it is zoomed in a bit much for some of the dark rides so it requires a bit of composition to compensate.

I just switch to it while in line for the rides or before I get into line and then switch back to the kit lens when I'm done.

The 18-200 may be my next lens unless I can score a wider zoom with a f2.8 that doesn't match my house note
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Nikon 18-200VR is almost the perfect 'walk around' lens for 95% of the stuff you'll do at Disney (or most places for that matter. Sure you'll want a 50 1.4 or 1.8 for dark rides, but for day light stuff, you'll do just fine with the 18-200.
 
Thanks for the welcome all!

I'll be in the world in 8 days for an 'over new years' trip. Kind of dreading the large crowds but hey, you're in WDW so it can't be that bad right? :)

I'll post some shots when I get back. If you haven't seen what the D300 is like yet in terms of colors, all I can say is WOW! Like him or not, Ken Rockwell has some great examples of amped up color on his site (http://www.kenrockwell.com). Judging by his examples, and what I've already shot at home (kids toys etc), I'm thinking the colors may be too intense using his methodology.

So far, the D300 has been GREAT. My wife used it to take some studio shots of the nephew, inlaws, and of course, our son! They turned out great! For tripod use, the 'live view' feature (also on the Canon 40D) is GREAT! (oh yeah, did I mention it has HDMI out?)
 
mPower,

I'll be interested in what you come back with from WDW with the D300. I have my D70 cranked for color from Ken's settings. Lately, for people shots, I see Ken has backed off a bit on his D300 Saturation setting from +3 to +2. Still using the VIVD Picture Setting (or whatever it's called!) though.

How do you like the Active D-Lighting? Hmmm....maybe you should do us up a review when you can. ;D

Oh, I did mention the 18-200VR is a great lens, right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Scott,

I noticed that he'd backed off of the 'vivid +3' for pics of his son (is it just me, or does he only have the one blue and white onesie?) and has gone to a 'normal +2'. All in what you want to get out of the shot, right?

To be honest, I haven had a lot of opportunity to test the D-lighting in different situations yet - very over cast lately, snow & generally BAD light to show differences. I'll see if I can't come up with some examples and post for everyone to see.

And yes, you did mention the 18-200 is a great lens. CHECK!

(FWIW I have been apprehensive about the 1.5 crop on the 50 1.4 for dark rides, so...I bit the 'non nikon lens' bullet today and ordered a Sigma 30 1.4 because it was in stock, and the 20 1.8 wasn't - We'll see how it does!)

Thanks,

Mark
 
well as all us rockwellians know, ken like's some serious saturation on his colors, check out some of his desert stuff in his galleries, so if he's backed it down a notch then i feel it has to be some vivid stuff

and welcome to the boards

and fwiw i rented the sig 30 f1.4 for canon last year for mousefest, i thought highly of it for my 20d, and almost took one to europe last may, but i ended up getting the 17-55 f2.8 IS which did great on an xti as a walkaround in cathedrals
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top