Nikon 18-200: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
File:nikon18-200_farm.jpg|Farm house in great light. If you have good light, any lens will be enough. | File:nikon18-200_farm.jpg|Farm house in great light. If you have good light, any lens will be enough. | ||
File:nikon18-200_lotus_crop.jpg|This lotus picture here is slightly [[crop]]ped. There is nothing wrong with a bit of crop, as practically all cameras have way too many pixels anyway. If you had a longer 18-300mm variant you would probably not need to [[crop]] this picture. On the other hand, cropping later, gives you more freedom. | File:nikon18-200_lotus_crop.jpg|This lotus picture here is slightly [[crop]]ped. There is nothing wrong with a bit of crop, as practically all cameras have way too many pixels anyway. If you had a longer 18-300mm variant you would probably not need to [[crop]] this picture. On the other hand, cropping later, gives you more freedom. | ||
File:nikon18-200_sharpness.jpg|A zoomed in landscape shot of an Alpine mountain range (Fluebrig near Einsiedeln). The marked regions show that the lens has some issues with [[sharpness]] even when stepped down. | |||
File:nikon18-200_center.png|This is the sharp part of the image. Note that at this distance, this is actually quite good. | |||
File:nikon18-200_left.png|The left part of the picture is not what you would be very happy about. | |||
File:nikon18-200_right.png|This is the right part more or less on a horizontal line. While you expect drop-off at edges, the centerline [[sharpness]] drop-off like that can make itself visible much more easily. | |||
</gallery> | </gallery> | ||
Latest revision as of 08:06, 28 December 2022
In theory, this would probably be the only lens that I ever needed. Sure in laboratory tests, many lenses would outperform this lens. There are wider wide angle lenses, longer telephoto lenses, prime lenses that are much faster, and macro lenses that can focus much closer. But this universal zoom is the one thing you can put on your camera and never take it off. Ideal for trips and at 550g not one of the heaviest lenses you can pick.
The problem with universal zooms is that they take away your need to buy more lenses. Of course, this is not something you realize before buying new lenses. You read reviews and say,I have to have this lens so I can take better pictures. If you have such a universal zoom you will be more often disappointed with your newest purchases. I speak from experience, I started with a Nikon 18-105 kit lens and I was really missing a bit on the longer end. I ended up getting a Nikon 70-300 which was a significant upgrade on the longer end. If I had the 18-200mm, the difference from 200mm to 300mm would not really convince me to carry the heavier zoom around.
I recently had to concede that the image quality (sharpness around the edges) sometimes ends up being a bit more noticeable for my taste. It will serve you for almost everything, but especially for landscape shots (where you need a bit more of the edges) you might be tempted to get an upgrade.
| Price | Relatively cheap |
|---|---|
| Weight | Moderate, 550g |
| Good for | General purpose for everything |
| New or used | New does not make sense, 18-300 is better, used can get it for 150, great deal as everyone wants the 18-300. |
No, this is not a lens to be used on a full frame camera. It will technically work, but your camera will switch to work as an APS-C camera. There is no sensible reason to use this on a full frame camera.
This is a APS-C zoom, it goes from quite wide to quite long, basically everything that you need. Since this is an APS-C lens the length is probably misleading, it is technically a 27-300mm universal zoom. Pair this with any APS-C and I would have no issues taking 95% of all the pictures I ever took just as well only with this lens.
This is a great deal as used, everybody values the 18-300 (which is newer and longer) so the 18-200 sells for far less. Although new versions sell for roughly the same, you pay more than 400 for a used 18-300, and less than 150 for a 18-200. That is simply crazy.
Gallery / see also
The lens fully extended
The 18-200 at its widest
The 18-200 at its longest
Example picture for focus, here on Bianca
Example picture for focus, again on Bianca
Close up shot of some flowers.
Farm house in great light. If you have good light, any lens will be enough.
A zoomed in landscape shot of an Alpine mountain range (Fluebrig near Einsiedeln). The marked regions show that the lens has some issues with sharpness even when stepped down.
This is the sharp part of the image. Note that at this distance, this is actually quite good.
The left part of the picture is not what you would be very happy about.
This is the right part more or less on a horizontal line. While you expect drop-off at edges, the centerline sharpness drop-off like that can make itself visible much more easily.
These pages are for Amateur Photographers and not really for seasoned photographers and professionals. I have no affiliation or commercial interest with any brand/make. I write from my own experience. I ended up using mainly Nikon, so I am more familiar with this brand than others. See price for notes on pricing as well as photography related links.