Nikon 28-200 G lens

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by kpatel55, Oct 23, 2005.

  1. kpatel55

    kpatel55

    6
    May 1, 2005
    Wichita, Kansas
    Nikon 28-200 G
    Any body have this lens, if you have it what is general impression, Contrst, Quality, Sharpness.

    Also Considerataion Sigma 70-300 APO DG lens.

    Which one I should get for my D70 and SB-800.

    Kirit :smile:
     
  2. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    I'd suggest you get the kit lens (18-70DX) and combine that with an inexpensive 50/1.8 Nikkor. Together they cover most aspects of general photography. When you have established your personal style in photography, which lens to purchase as the third one will be quite evident to you.
     
  3. kpatel55

    kpatel55

    6
    May 1, 2005
    Wichita, Kansas
    nfoto,

    Soory I forgot to tell you that I have kit + 50 1.8 lens, but needs some zoom range.

    also sigma 70-300 has Macro.

    Kirit
     
  4. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    Then a 300/4 lens would be a better option. Or 70-200 if you can afford it.

    28-200 lenses are not what I would look into, if quality is important.
     
  5. Hi Kirit,

    I have the 28-200G lens. For the price, it is a fine lens. It is also quite small and very light, at 28mm it is about the same size as the 18-70DX lens. I really like this lens when walking around a town when traveling as you can get fairly wide and also zoom in on an interesting architecture item. I feel that the image quality with the 28-200G is similar to the 18-70DX that you have.
    It is certainly not in the same class as the 300 F4 (which I don't have) or the 70-200 AFS-VR (which I do have) but they cost 3x to 5x more.

    I also have the 70-300ED which is comparable to the 70-300's that you are looking at. Again they are very good for the price but not 80-400 VR quality.

    You need to consider what you like to shoot. Both of the lenses you are looking at will work well in many situations. If you start trying to shoot flying birds, or wildlife in the distance, you will want to trade up to some of the more expensive lenses.

    Good luck deciding what to do,
    Bob
     
  6. I have the 28-200G and the 70-300D. I really like the 28-200G as it is so small and light and covers such a wide zoom range. It stays on one of my D70 bodies all the time. I seldom use the 70-300 as once you get beyond 200mm you really need a tripod or monopod which is extra trouble.

    If you saw my Canadian Rockies pictures which I posted a few weeks ago you can get an idea of the quality of the 28-200, as most of those pictures were taken with that lens.

    Here is an example with the 28-200 @ 200mm:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 28, 2005
  7. dbirdsong

    dbirdsong Guest

    I own it and it is a really nice lens. I just don't use it very much because of the fast glass I own. I am interested in selling it.
     
  8. Jonathan

    Jonathan

    676
    Jun 11, 2005
    Southern Maine
    I have the 28-200

    I thought it would likely go for sale soon because most of what I have is fast glass, and I though it would be a certain let down. It's one of my favorites for a walk around lenses. I like it much better than the 18-70 because of the range. Ialso have the 23-120VR, but the 28-200 gets more use.

    It's much better than the price would have you believe.
     
  9. papa85

    papa85 Guest

    I have it and it is suprizingly good it is small and a great walk around lens , it has it spot in my bag and i have a good nikon arsenal of lenses. But again it is not used as much as the beast. :biggrin:
     
  10. I had the 28-200 and had far better luck at getting good pictures with it than any 70-300. It isn't macro but focuses fairly close. I would have kepy it but my main complaint was the SLOW focusing speed on my D70. I upgraded to the top end zooms except the beast which is next. I just have to put up with the weight. Quality pictures for dollar though as long as focusing speed is not essential it ranks in my mind as one of Nikon's best lenses.
     
  11. fks

    fks

    Apr 30, 2005
    sf bay area
    hi kirit-

    i have the 28-200mm, and it's a good bargain. colors and contrast are good, sharpness is good if you stop down a bit. focus is slow, and zooming is in the opposite direction of other nikon lenses. i'd recommend it as a good walk-around lens.

    most of the photos in this gallery were taken with the 28-200mm.

    if you have the time to wait and the money to spend, there's rumours of an 18-200mm VR AF-S lens. if the quality's as good as the 28-200mm, i'll probably get it to replace my 28-200mm.

    ricky
     
  12. Keaka

    Keaka

    227
    Oct 13, 2005
    Richmond BC
    The 28-200G was my first lens when I jumped into the DSLR world.. and the lens is tack sharp, has great contrast and is a bang for the buck. The only downfall is focusing speed.. its not a problem unless you shoot moving objects a lot, and even then I was able to get a ton of great pics of my ferrets with it.

    In the end I went for faster glass and eventually a full prime kit but if I had to use a f3.5-5.6 range lens, this would be the one.
     
  13. Steve S

    Steve S

    Feb 1, 2005
    SE Florida
    28-200G is a good "Good Light" lens, but it is very slow to acquire a focus lock in less than great lighting ocnditions with my D70.
    This was taken with it @200mm:
    41757561.
    and this @135mm:
    41741251.
    this @52mm:
    41822019.
    finally, this @28mm:
    42025639.
     
  14. Fropa

    Fropa Guest

    Nice shots Steve S. I am going to be buying a D200 and I was looking at the 28-200mm G tonight as a starter zoom lens. I need a lens to shoot my sons graduation so no major speed needed (I don't think) but I will need the zoom capability. I also don't expect to do any sport shooting any time soon. Will this lens do the job for the graduation pix? Have you tried it on the D200?

    Thanks for the help.
     
  15. Steve S

    Steve S

    Feb 1, 2005
    SE Florida
    Well, if it's an indoors ceremony, I think I'd be at least a little concerned about getting a quick focus lock. As I said, and as you can see from the examples, my shots were all done in good outdoor light. Any chance you could test one? The 18-200VR is a better choice for indoors, although it costs twice as much.
     
Loading...