18-200mm VR II compared to... - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

06/17/2006 06:19:35 PM · #3

Thanks for posting this. I agree with you, it looks like it certainly competes with the big boys. I have ordered this one from three different shops, so I'll see which one gets here first. I've been waiting about 2-months already. Thanks again for posting the comparison. Makes me happy to see how well it holds up against the legendary 70-200.

wavelength

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

06/17/2006 06:23:40 PM · #4

Doesn't look like the 200mm shots are framed the same, and the 18-200 looks a little fuzzy here.... ??

yakatme

Lytro Illum Light Field Digital

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

06/17/2006 06:35:22 PM · #5

Originally posted by wavelength:

Doesn't look like the 200mm shots are framed the same, and the 18-200 looks a little fuzzy here.... ??

I agree, that compared to the 70-200 VR, the 18-200 VR might seem a little fuzzy. I have the 70-200 VR and wouldn't choose any other lense to replace it, but I am considering replacing my 18-70 with the 18-200 VR.

I would like to see comparisons between these two. If the 18-200 can compete with the 18-70 within the 18-70 range, then it would make a fantastic 'walk-around' lense since it would do the job of the 18-70, plus the 71-200 range and the VR.

Again for me, it would replace the 18-70, not the 70-200 f2.8 VR.

kosmikkreeper

Nikon D300s

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

06/18/2006 08:07:09 AM · #6

For those wondering how it stacks up to the 18-70mm well, I did test the 18-70mm at the same time but didn't bother putting up the comparisin shots since they really the 18-70mm shots didn't stack up. But for those wondering if they should sell their kit lens for the 18-200mm....

To me there's no question. The 18-200mm blows the 18-70mm out of the water! I'm still awed by this lens' quality for an 11x zoom!

GuGi

Nikon D750

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

06/18/2006 08:49:42 AM · #7

Thank you for posting those Yanik, a great help. Saving every penny from now on :)

yakatme

Lytro Illum Light Field Digital

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

06/18/2006 10:03:58 AM · #8

Thanks for the comparison shots between these two lenses and for the PM that brought my attention back to this thread.

I'd like to get this lense, but I'm going for more reach than my 70-200 VR first (probably the Sigma 80-400 OS) and then a good macro lens (who knows what).

Then it will be time to start replacing good lenses like the 18-70 with the 18-200 VR. When I do that, I'll seriously consider doing it via the D200 kit route.

Time to start building more waterfalls and selling more trees.

GuGi

Nikon D750

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

06/19/2006 04:31:52 AM · #9

Originally posted by yakatme:

I'll seriously consider doing it via the D200 kit route.

Now THAT is a good idea if ever I saw one. Thanks yakatme!!!!!

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

06/19/2006 06:16:48 AM · #10

I'd have to say that it looks like the 70-200mm VR won hands down, especially in that last shot of the maroon red/silver thing but overall 18-200 did do a great job all around.

kosmikkreeper

Nikon D300s

06/20/2006 12:23:04 PM · #11

bump for the day gang!

Djabordjabor

Nikon D3

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

06/20/2006 12:36:16 PM · #12

70-200 is the sharpest, but WOW 18-200 VR is so close. I think it's a very nice lens. It's even better than 17-55 in this test. 18-200 looks yummy but first I'm going to get 70-200.

Zal

Nikon D200

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Nikon

06/20/2006 12:50:37 PM · #13

No doubt that the 18-200 is a great lens, but at f/8, just about any lens could and should deliver good image quality.

What you are paying for on the 17-55 and the 70-200 is the ability to shoot at f/2.8 when you need to for shutter speed and/or DOF. Also, I'd be willing to bet that the 17-55 and the 70-200 are sharper wide open at f/2.8 than the 18-200 is wide open at f/3.5-5.6.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

06/20/2006 01:08:39 PM · #14

Originally posted by Zal:

What you are paying for on the 17-55 and the 70-200 is the ability to shoot at f/2.8 when you need to for shutter speed and/or DOF. Also, I'd be willing to bet that the 17-55 and the 70-200 are sharper wide open at f/2.8 than the 18-200 is wide open at f/3.5-5.6.

One thing the saleman at B&H insisted on was that the 70-200mm 2.8 VR was sharp as a tack and mainted it's contrast/color all around. Edge to edge and throught the aperture range. He wasn't lying...

I played with this photo a lot and at 640 it's hard to tell exactly how sharp it was but that bokeh is insane if you ask me. I'm curious whether the 18-200mm can deliver that?

BTW...my camera was off and in my bag when I saw that girl and I got that shot off, taken handheld, within 8-10 seconds....and she was gone.

Message edited by author 2006-06-20 13:14:55.

sea2c

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8

06/20/2006 01:19:58 PM · #15

Sounds like some more 18-70 lenses are coming on the market from you guys. When they do, let me know I'd definitely be interested in helping one of you get the 18-200!

fatLouie

Nikon D70s

06/21/2006 09:46:25 AM · #16

Originally posted by pawdrix:

I played with this photo a lot and at 640 it's hard to tell exactly how sharp it was but that bokeh is insane if you ask me. I'm curious whether the 18-200mm can deliver that?

Nope! That's my biggest issue with the 18-200VR; the bokeh blows. I'm beginning to fool around with primes and I'm beginning to ralize just how important sharpness at a wide aperture is. I'll stick with my 18-70 for now, but when I need a long lense I know I'll be reaching for the 70-200 VR.

EDIT: Errrr... maybe I won't. $1500 is a lot!!

Message edited by author 2006-06-21 09:49:25.

agenkin

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

Nikon MF Nikkor 20mm f/3.5 AIS

06/21/2006 09:53:10 AM · #17

Originally posted by kosmikkreeper:

All shots were at ISO 100 and f8.

What's the point of comparing the lenses at f/8? *Most* lenses are quite sharp at f/8. There are $200 lenses which are just as sharp. Compare them wide open and stopped down until, say f/5.6 to get a meaningful comparison. Also, you need to compare the frames in the center, as well as sides and corners. Compare 100% crops with no post processing, with in-camera sharpening set to none.

agenkin

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

Nikon MF Nikkor 20mm f/3.5 AIS

06/21/2006 09:57:36 AM · #18

Originally posted by kosmikkreeper:

Judge for yourself!

Looks like even at f/8 at 135mm and 200mm the 70-200VR is notably sharper.

Don't get me wrong: the 18-200VR is a great lens for what it is, I even plan on getting it eventually, but it's no substitute for better glass.

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

06/21/2006 10:01:50 AM · #19

Here another from the 70-200mm VR. A tough exposure due to his white hair in the sunlight but pretty sharp all around, keeping in mind it was taken in a rush at f 2.8.

I'm not familiar with the 18-200mm but it seems good for all around use. I just don't think I could live without the 2.8 constant at this point. It seems to be playing a major role in how I shoot these days. The 640 doesn't do this shot much justice but the quality is there.

Message edited by author 2006-06-21 10:03:44.

Kronus

Nikon D7000

06/21/2006 10:03:28 AM · #20

the 18-200 will it go f/2.8?