| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Anyone using a Nikon 18-200 VR lens...?
Bert Entwistle, Photographer
 |
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 12:46 PM on 09.03.09 |
->> Has anyone been using a Nikon 18-200 VR lens and what do you think?
bert |
|
Chris Russick, Photographer, Assistant
|
St. Petersburg | FL | USA | Posted: 1:07 PM on 09.03.09 |
| ->> It's my pick up and go lens for when I'm on vacation with the family and don't want to lug around a trunk full of gear. This lens on a D300 seems to work just fine for us. I've not used it in a professional capacity though. |
|
Jim Work, Photographer
|
Alpine | TX | USA | Posted: 1:43 PM on 09.03.09 |
| ->> I also bought one with the purpose of use as a personal lens, but have used it on jobs. The varing fstop when you are in manual and using non TTL flash is a bit of a pain to take into account. All in all it is a nice piece of glass for the $$$...............God Spede............gym |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 1:46 PM on 09.03.09 |
->> Its a very cool lens covering an effective 27-300mm so for most "general" photography its an ideal all in one solution and its made even better with a great VR system.
Its still something of a consumer build quality, pretty darn solid and well made. I in no way felt it was going to break or not stand up to serious usage. Pretty decent optics as well, nothing stellar, but no real issues either.
Its not that small/light though, and its not that cheap however. For a travel type of lens it would be great along with a wide angle solution and maybe a fast prime.
Personally I'd suggest checking out the 70-300 VR as well. That lens is really amazing optically, works on both DX and FX, is affordable and gives some really nice reach for little money. Its always in my bag unless I specifically need a f2.8 zoom for sports or low light work. |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 3:50 PM on 09.03.09 |
->> Bert - It's a nifty walk-around lens, I've used it for a lot of publications work. It's a compromise, of course, but it is one lens that can do a lot of things "pretty good."
Jim - What is the "using non-TTL flash" all about? TTL (including i-TTL and AWL) work just fine with this lens. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 4:47 PM on 09.03.09 |
->> Chuck, I believe he means if your using manual flash rather than a TTL type flash mode that can adjust the flash output in relation to the changing aperture.
In other words, if your lighting is manually dialed in at a given output level for the camera at 1/250th and F3.5, and the zoom the lens to where its now 1/250th and f5.6, your lighting is going to be underexposed because it can't adapt to the non-constant aperture. |
|
Chris Russick, Photographer, Assistant
|
St. Petersburg | FL | USA | Posted: 9:43 AM on 09.04.09 |
->> Quote "covering an effective 27-300mm"
Jeff, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that the lens is a true 18-200 as it's a DX lens. When I put it on the D300, it has almost the same field of view as the D3 with my 17-35. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 11:11 AM on 09.04.09 |
->> Chris, due to the 1.5x crop factor on a DX body, for the lens to have the same FOV as a 17mm on FX it would need to be about 11mm.
Focal length is focal length regardless of the mount its designed for. But the crop factor means your not using the full image circle resulting in whats easiest to think of and express in FX terms. We still use the equiv FOV in 35mm term for some reason which is perhaps a little odd as many photographers never shot 35mm film before lol.
If that lens could give a true 18mm-200mm in 35mm equivalent format it would definitely be a real optical feat as I've never come across anything wider than 24mm. Would be awesome though if it could cover the range of a wide angle zoom like the 17-35, mid range zoom like the 24-70 and a tele zoom like the 70-200 all in one lens. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 11:26 AM on 09.04.09 |
->> DX just means it is meant for DX cameras. If you try to put a DX lens on a D3 it will auto-crop the image in your viewfinder and lower the pixels. Not sure how much. But, it does.
FX lenses work on both with the full field of view in the viewfinder, just have to deal with the crop factor.
Either way, the crop factor for Nikon is still 1.5x and if you put it on a DX body like a D300, D200, D90, etc. you are getting a 27-300 out of an 18-200. Still, I have heard nothing but positive things about this being a good utility lens. |
|
John Plassenthal, Photographer
|
Vandalia | OH | USA | Posted: 12:40 PM on 09.04.09 |
| ->> I got this lens originally for family and travel. While I don't use it for sports, it has become the default lens for nearly everything else. I find it to focus fast, and provide sharp clear images through the entire focal length. Use one for a while and you'll be suprised how much you come to rely on it. |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
|
Mike Strasinger, Photographer
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 4:27 AM on 09.09.09 |
| ->> Ahh...I was reading it as "The varing fstop when you are in manual" AND "using non TTL flash" (i.e., two separate points) rather than taking it as a whole. OK, I get it, but...geez...just use CLS. :) |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|