1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

18-200 vs 16-85, my considerations after comparison

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by slick2000, Aug 16, 2009.

  1. slick2000

    slick2000

    174
    Apr 21, 2009
    Roma, ITALY
    Well, after reading every review and opinion on the net, 5 months ago I choose the 18-200, but without the chance to test none of them.

    For a couple of weeks I had the chance, thanks to my bro, to do a side by side comparison (and to put my hands on the D300),
    well .. the 16-85 is "better", I don't see any real flaw, real loss of sharpness on the borders, CA and other aberrations.

    The 18-200 has (well my copy has), unfortunately, a couple of annoying flaws: at 135mm is unusable, is freaking soft, and from time to time there are some abberrations that will pop-up from the monitor :eek: 
    examples:
    look at the legs of the white table on the right (full size image)
    621384623_XrvAq-XL.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    look at the wooden box on the very right (full size image)
    621382739_NRVAb-XL.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    135mm softness (full image)
    621387964_agAEn-XL.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    I can replicate whenever I want the softness at 135mm, and I have to avoid f5.6 to get those randoms aberrations.

    I won't post any side by side pic to compare the 18-200 with the 16-85 sorry :tongue:, please have a look at my Smugmug, the "Grottaferrata" gallery is done with the 16-85 and the 75-300, but you won't find an equivalent, in that gallery, with the 18-200.

    So, I would buy the 18-200 again ? Of course yes ...
    apart from those, occasional, flaws, the 18-200 is on par with the IQ, or at least negligeable worse, but once you get used with the range from 18 to 200, this is the perfect walk-around-turist lens ...

    well, that was my two cents :smile:

    cheers, Nik
     
  2. andrzejmakal

    andrzejmakal

    571
    Apr 30, 2008
    Poland
    I don`t get it (due to my poor english...?).
    Are you happy with 18-200 or not?
    cheers
     
  3. slick2000

    slick2000

    174
    Apr 21, 2009
    Roma, ITALY
    yes, there are better lenses, but IMHO the 18-200 IS the DX most versatile lens, even if the IQ it's not top notch.

    Nik
     
  4. gladjo

    gladjo Guest

    I lost my 18-200 a few weeks ago and I was thinking about a 16-85 but the difference was negligable and not worth missing a longer shot changing lenses. So I got me another 18-200. You are correct. It's the best walking around lense for me.
     
  5. zahidkm

    zahidkm

    499
    Jan 5, 2009
    Houston, TX
    how can you just lost a lens? thats a nightmare.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.