18-200 VR alternatives

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

  1. MikeyD40

    MikeyD40

    151
    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

    jmmtn4aj

    170
    Apr 12, 2007
    Singapore
    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

    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

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    105 VR
    Great lens
     
  7. weiran

    weiran

    966
    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

    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

    MikeyD40

    151
    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

    MikeyD40

    151
    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

    weiran

    966
    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    I think the Sigma 18-200OS will autofocus with the D40.
     
  13. chrisnck

    chrisnck

    27
    Jul 19, 2007
    mass
    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:

    http://www.sigmaphoto.com/news/news.asp?nID=3324

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

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/485229-REG/Sigma_888_306_18_200mm_f_3_5_6_3_DC_OS.html

    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.

    http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_80400_4556os/index.htm

    +/? 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

    jmmtn4aj

    170
    Apr 12, 2007
    Singapore
    For the price of an 18-200, why not a second used D40 with a used 55-200 VR? :biggrin:

    I kid I kid..
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Nikon 300mm f/2.8 VR - First Impressions Lens Lust Sunday at 7:58 PM
Nikon 200-500mm VR question Lens Lust Dec 5, 2017
Sports Lens: 200-500 f/5.6 or 300/2.8 VR I Lens Lust Dec 4, 2017
Affordable alternatives to the 18-200mm VR? Lens Lust May 21, 2009
18-55 VR hood alternative question... Lens Lust Apr 28, 2009