Does someone here own D7K and 18-200VR combo?

Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
1,011
Location
Los Angeles
Hi, just picked up a D7K body. Don't have any 18-XXX walkaround at this point. I am between 18-105, 18-200 and 16-85, the usual suspects.
Thom Hogan in his review of D7K stares that 18-105 is borderline, 18-200 is mediocre, and 16-85 is the only one that seems to pass the mustard of pixel-pitch-heavy 16MP DX sensor. 18-105 was the lens I had last year and it seemed to be ok, but 18-200 range I like better for walkaround/vacation type shots.

My search of D7K and 18-200Vr on flickr so far reveals what Thom says as completely true, most samples with that combo are mediocre, not sharp, uninspiring, while photos from D300 and lower megapixel bodies with the same 18-200Vr look just fine to me.

So my question is whether anyone is using a D7K and 18-200VR combo and can post decent quality shots with that combo, if they exist of course
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
2,967
Location
Sydney Australia
To be honest, I used the D7K with the 18-200. Between 18 to about 100mm it was fine. But once you got up around the 150 to 200 mark I really wasnt happy with the results. I know your looking for quality shots but I really dont have any available. I was that unhappy with the results I puchased all new glass (as per my sig)

I know that doesnt really help, just thought I'd share.
 
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
1,011
Location
Los Angeles
To be honest, I used the D7K with the 18-200. Between 18 to about 100mm it was fine. But once you got up around the 150 to 200 mark I really wasnt happy with the results. I know your looking for quality shots but I really dont have any available. I was that unhappy with the results I puchased all new glass (as per my sig)

I know that doesnt really help, just thought I'd share.
No thanks, that confirms everything I've been reading and thinking..... I will probably go for 18-105VR and save a tons in mean time
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
1,291
Location
Kitchener, ON
I'll put up a few Christmas gathering shots. One wide, one mid, one long. I was happy enough with these, but have since purchased the Sigma 17-70 in my signature. My biggest problem with the 18-200VR was on longer landscape shots on my D90, especially on hazy days. It just compounded the haze issue, I think. Going to the 70-300VR really showed me what I was missing. I haven't tried this type of shot with the D7000.

These are all interior light only. I've learned a bit about sharpening settings for the D7000 images since then, but I don't think you can tell the difference on this size image. I hope they are helpful.

18mm (ISO 800)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


34mm (ISO 3200)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


200mm (ISO 3200)
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
1,011
Location
Los Angeles
Thanks, Omar. your shots are illustrative. Sigma 17-70 is an amazingly sharp lens, I had an older version on my D300 couple years ago and it was great. I probably would have gotten one as well, but I already have Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 so we are talking about the same range. I also have 70-300VR and like it very much. Do you use your 18-105?
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
1,291
Location
Kitchener, ON
Do you use your 18-105?
I put it on my D40 as my carry everywhere camera kit. If I had known I was going to buy the Sigma, I wouldn't have bought the 18-105. Instead, I would have just put the 18-200VR on the D40.

Here's a snap I got last week while at a business retreat. You don't see it here, but that lens has significant barreling, worse than the 18-200VR I think.

D40/18-105VR at ISO 800, handheld (jammed against the 15th floor window) at 1/3 second:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
1,291
Location
Kitchener, ON
I'll still carry the 18-200 when a single lens is the best solution (walk-about vacation style with decent lighting). But where possible, my intent is to carry at least the Sigma and the 70-300VR. It's almost as easy to carry the D40 with the second lens as it is to carry just the second lens, so that will be a common practice for me as well when I need quick access to both long and wide lenses.
 
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
1,011
Location
Los Angeles
I sold my last D40 a while back so all I have at this point is D300 and D7K. We used to go on vacation with me using D300 and sigma 17-70 and my wife using D80 or D40x with 18-135 and we were happy with those combos in general, but there were instances when we wanted to go beyond 135. My next vacation is Europe, South of France, Barcelona, and South of Spain, and I am not sure I will be needing too much of tele there.
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
371
Location
Atlanta, GA
I have the D7000 and had the 18-105VR. I was very unhappy with the results. I didn't keep the lens more than two weeks.
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
224
Location
Fairfax, VA
I have the combo you're researching. Nowadays, I use the 18-200 more on the wide end. I rarely use it at or near the 200mm range because sharpness falls off. It was my first lens and I used it for everything. I really didn't realize how heavy the combo was until I started using mostly primes.
 
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
1,011
Location
Los Angeles
I have the combo you're researching. Nowadays, I use the 18-200 more on the wide end. I rarely use it at or near the 200mm range because sharpness falls off. It was my first lens and I used it for everything. I really didn't realize how heavy the combo was until I started using mostly primes.
I held D7000 and 18-200VR combo at my local Costco store today and it seemed lighter than I thought it would be (they are selling it with version 2 of 18-200)...... I am more concerned about lack of sharpness issue..... I wonder if you have any examples at tele end with that combo?
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
177
Location
Cardiff, CA
Here's a 170mm shot with a D300 at 1/800 f8 with the center and top edge at 100%. As you can see the center is just OK but the edge is quite soft. I've done a lot of testing with the lens and another sample. North of 135mm at any f stop the edges and corners are just not acceptable IMHO. I don't use the lens anymore. Hope this helps your decision making.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
20,731
Location
SW Virginia
I have a D7000 and the following: 18-105VR, 18-200VR, and 16-85VR. The 18-200 stays on my wife's D60 and she wants nothing else. I used one on a D70 and D200 but have never been tempted to mount it on the D7000.

The 18-105 is quite sharp in the center but soft around the edges, especially at 18mm. I keep it as a backup to the 18-200, which has been in the shop twice already for loose elements, and needs to go in again.

I would advise you to save your $$$ and look for a good used 16-85VR. You'll be much happier in the long run.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
11
Location
NY
I'll cast one lonely vote for the 18-200. I have one on my D7000 and routinely get decent quality images ... This is not to say that the images are as sharp as they would be if taken with better (read "more expensive") glass but they are acceptably sharp for printing and don't exhibit the softness of some of the photos displayed here. Of course, I do shoot with a tripod and mirror lock-up most of the time but even my hand held shots look pretty good.

All that said ... my game plan now is to save my money for the 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8's since I believe this camera can really take good advantage of them and since they will be useful when I eventually take the FX plunge down the road.
 
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
1,011
Location
Los Angeles
Just ordered myself a 18-105VR. Re: 17-55, I am considering trading my D300 for 17-55, but I am not sure I can 'trust' my D7000 to be my only body
 
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
2,493
Location
Denmark
My search of D7K and 18-200Vr on flickr so far reveals what Thom says as completely true, most samples with that combo are mediocre, not sharp, uninspiring, while photos from D300 and lower megapixel bodies with the same 18-200Vr look just fine to me.
Bear in mind that you may be looking at photos from people who upgraded from a point and shoot. The 18-200 is often purchased as a one size fits all, by people new to a DSLR. Uncritical and inexperienced users are most likely the bigger reason the shots are as mediocre as you report.

I am not saying you should run out and buy an 18-200, merely that your skill set may be different, and your results may be much better because of it.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom