18-200 VR alternatives

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by MikeyD40, Jul 28, 2007.

  1. MikeyD40


    Feb 18, 2007
    Arlington, TX
    Hello all...I am currently lusting over the 18-200 VR and was wondering if there were any comparable alternatives to this lens.

    I like the idea of one lens taking the place of my two current AF-S lenses.

    Thanks yall!
  2. I just bought a Tamron 18-250 yesterday, reviews say better images than tamron 18-200 and possibly better than Nikon. The downside is slower focus and no VR. The upside is at $499 it's just 2/3 the price.
  3. jmmtn4aj


    Apr 12, 2007
    For me I find >100mm to be useless most of the time without a tripod or VR. But for the range, yes, there is the Tamron which offers more range and same/better IQ.
  4. My wife and I have gotten some good images from the Nikkor 28-200G. Of course it isn't nearly as wide as your 18-55, and you have no VR, which, as stated above, is very helpful for the longer focal lengths.

    I would suggest that you just save up and try to find a good used 18-200VR. It makes a dandy do-everything outfit with the D40.
  5. Cope


    Apr 5, 2007
    Houston, Texas
    I would recommend that you look at the Tamron 18-250. It has received great actual user reviews in Nikon, Canon and KM/Sony mounts.
  6. Gale


    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    105 VR
    Great lens
  7. weiran


    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    105VR isn't an alternative for an 18-200, its in a completely different category and league.

    If you can you should sit tight and see what the Sigma 18-200 OS brings, I don't think it has HSM but it does have an in-lens motor, but the Tamron 18-250 is a great alternative if you're going to be shooting mostly in good light.

    I get very good shots with my Sigma 70-200 all the time, as I did with my 70-300G and with my 400mm f/5.6. You just have to have good light.
  8. mood


    Jun 27, 2007
    suburbia, ny
    selling my 18-200
    just don't like the long end enough
    have my 80-200 to lug for zoo or when I know I want 200mm and great IQ
    and there are much better wider zoom options
    I'm gonna grab a 17-55 DX for walk around
  9. MikeyD40


    Feb 18, 2007
    Arlington, TX
    Hey yall, thanks for the input. I guess for now, i will stick with Nikon's 18-200 (not like i am getting it anytime soon) since I am kinda limited to AF-s lenses.
  10. The Nikon 18-200 D40 is an amazingly fun combination. It might be worth selling your 55-200 and 18-55 for. I have actually found times where I'll take a shot at 18 and then seconds later take another at 200. For things like sunsets/action you would miss the shot changing lenses.
  11. MikeyD40


    Feb 18, 2007
    Arlington, TX
    Oh believe me, i might have to sell those two lenses before i get the 18-200 in order to fund that lens...per my wife...but seriously, i have lost precious shots of my son and daughter by switching lenses..and sometimes, i feel like i am gonna drop one of them during the process.
  12. weiran


    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    I think the Sigma 18-200OS will autofocus with the D40.
  13. chrisnck


    Jul 19, 2007
    I own the sigma 18-200 for my all around lens and its sharp no regrets
  14. According to this updated list from Sigma, the upcoming-for-Nikon-mount Sigma 18-200 OS will auto-focus on the D40 and D40x:


    B&H Photo already lists the Nikon version (as releasing in approximately "July") for $549: The Canon version started shipping a few weeks ago.


    Without any reviews, this is a "theoretical" comparison:

    + The Sigma will be about $200 cheaper than the Nikon.

    + Neither are macro lenses, but the Sigma will focus a little closer, for a 1:3.9 magnification ratio vs. the Nikon's 1:4.5.

    +/-/? The Sigma is about a tenth of an inch longer, a tenth of an inch wider, and weighs 1.7 ounces more. Very slight difference. Is it made better/worse? Don't know.

    - The Sigma will be a third of a stop slower at longer focal lengths.

    - Based on the limited, current information, the Sigma is not HSM and probably uses a conventional micro-motor -- so it would probably focus a little noisier and slower than the Nikon, though it'd be better than a non-motorized lens on a D50/D70/D80/etc.

    ? Optical quality is the big question mark.

    ? Image stabilization effectiveness is another big question mark. Photozone's review of the the Sigma 80-400 OS in a Canon mount had some complaints. Hopefully Sigma has made improvements.


    +/? Will it creep like the Nikon does? It does list a lock mechanism -- will it creep if it's not locked?

    Obviously it's best to wait until reviews of the lens are in!
  15. jmmtn4aj


    Apr 12, 2007
    For the price of an 18-200, why not a second used D40 with a used 55-200 VR? :biggrin:

    I kid I kid..