28-75 vs 18-200 - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/12/2008 04:05:59 PM · #1

Tamron 28-75mm vs Nikon 18-200

I know, this sounds like a no brainer. But is it? The Tamron is about half the price but is f2.8 all the way.
I recently lost some equipment and I might get some insurance money to replace it. These are the top choices right now for a carry-around lens.

Message edited by author 2008-03-12 16:09:19.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

03/12/2008 04:16:30 PM · #2

perhaps i just lack optimism ... but i just don't believe an 11x zoom is going to be any good

i read the "verdict" over at photozone ... he thought it was ok, not bad, not great

problem is that space from 18mm to 28mm is a long ways ... will you be ok without it? Currently my widest lens is 24mm, I'm wishing it were wider.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

03/12/2008 04:27:16 PM · #3

Were you really happy with the 18-200? If so, stick with it.

However, while the Nikon 18-200 is an impressive lens, I highly doubt it'll be near the quality of the Tamron. Plus, the 2.8 is a big deal and you'll love it (low light, shallow DOF...). Then take the money left over and buy the sigma 70-300 APO DG for telephoto.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

03/12/2008 04:35:01 PM · #4

The lens creep on the 18-200 bothered me more than I thought it would (when lens is pointed downward it must be held in place otherwise your going to 200mm). Other issues: The bokeh is far from beautiful. The size of the lens itself interferes with the built-in flash in many cases but it looks like maybe the other lens would do the same. Obviously the speedlight would be used in most cases.

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

03/12/2008 04:42:58 PM · #5

I would be concerned about the loss at the wide end. 28mm is not very wide and is the reason I never jumped at the Tamron. I do have the 18-200 but as everyone has said it is a compromise lens. A new one you might look at in the same price range is the new Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX Nikkor Lens.

BTW - I agree about the lens creep. Drives me crazy with Nikon lenses. Why don't they do a simple lock like Tamron?

Message edited by author 2008-03-12 16:45:10.

Nikolai1024

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 24-85mm f2.8-4.0D

03/12/2008 04:43:52 PM · #6

Originally posted by hopper:

...
problem is that space from 18mm to 28mm is a long ways ... will you be ok without it? Currently my widest lens is 24mm, I'm wishing it were wider.

This is probably the biggest issue. I think 28mm is not nearly wide enough for me.

Prof_Fate

03/12/2008 04:45:58 PM · #7

What's important to you? The 18-200 is gonna be convenient and probably be a woderful walk around lens and be fine outdoors. Inside it will suck, well, not being a 2.8 constant ap it won't be as bright so focus will be slower as well as shutter speed. The 28-75 should beat it in image quality, but if you need 200mm you need it - you can't always walk closer (or they'd not bother to make and sell long lenses, huh?)

Tycho

Nikon D70

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

03/12/2008 04:49:51 PM · #8

Personally I'd take the 18-200 over the Tamron any day of the week. The Tamron would be of very little, if any, use to me. I know what I need, what's important to me and how much I can afford to spend on a lens. So, it's just a simple matter of doing the math and making a decision based on the result.

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 24-85mm f2.8-4.0D

03/12/2008 05:04:29 PM · #9

Any recommendations for a zoom 2.8 lens that's under 800$ ?

Nikolai1024

Nikon D300

03/12/2008 05:16:03 PM · #10

Originally posted by metatate:

Any recommendations for a zoom 2.8 lens that's under 800$ ?

I use 24-85 f2.8-4. It is not full 2.8 but costs around $600. It is very sharp and does some macro. I'm very happy with it.

Bud

Canon EOS-550D Rebel T2i

Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM

03/12/2008 07:12:52 PM · #11

I have the Sigma 18-200 OS and it is amazing. When I can only take one lens, that is the one. As a walk around and as a low profile lens, the 18-200 is amazing and I understand the Nikon is even better. The 18mm is a big deal also. 28mm just isn't wide enough.

jdannels

Nikon D300s

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Nikon

03/12/2008 07:44:51 PM · #12

I have the Tamron 17-50 2.8. It is just a wider version of the 28-75, technically it was built for a cropped sensor, so wouldn't do well on a D3 if you ever come to that bridge. I realize I am a wide angle guy, I had the 28-75 and sold it for this version. I would recommend the 17-50 to anyone, it is very sharp and is around $400-450 new. Might not have the reach you want though. I was thinking it may not be as sexy as 2.8 glass but what about the Nikon 18-70 3.5-4.5? I liked this lens a lot until it fell out of my bag and stopped focusing properly. I think too you could get a good deal on one used.

Quigley

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/12/2008 08:14:28 PM · #13

I HAD the 18-200 and it drove me crazy the lens creep was to much and the people at Nikon themselves said that I should just get used to it. The tech at Nikon told me when I spoke to him on the phone that I should "spill a little Coke on the lens and that should gum up the works enough to make it usable". What a poop head, that's his solution to the defect in the lens. Now don't get me wrong when the lens was new and I wasn't having problems with it I was very happy but that only lasted a month and a half and it took me six months to get my money back from Nikon. They took that long to decide before they would let the store where I purchased the lens give me back the money and even then they didn't want to give me all my money back because I had the lens for eight months according to their records. After pointing out to them that I had the lens for a month and a half and they had it for six and a half they saw fit to give me back all my money.

That being said (boy I feel better) I bought the 105 macro 2.8 vr with the money. Not what your looking for but boy is it sweet.

I would go for the Tamron 17-50 2.8 the Nikon 18-70 3.5-4.5 I use that lens a lot and just love the results.

All the best and good luck with your choice.

MAX!

Nuno

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/12/2008 09:33:12 PM · #14

The new 16.85 sound like a good compromise. For a cropped sensor 18mm is "normal" not wide enough for many things.

If I where you and I had the money I would buy the Tamron 28-70 and the Tokina 12-24mm. or if you really need the extra reach buy the Nikon 70-300 D-ED and the 12-24, and fill the gap with a 50mm f1.8. Probably this will be all you need for a good deal of situations.

banmorn

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

03/12/2008 09:47:20 PM · #15

Nikon 18-200VR Lens Creep help

I have and use as my walk around lens this: Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 OS It does not have any creep issues to date.

Message edited by author 2008-03-12 21:50:48.

banmorn

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

03/13/2008 08:38:22 AM · #16

bump

03/13/2008 02:33:18 PM · #17

In hopes that my insurance does come through and pay out for my loss, I have been reading up on so many lenses. I'm thinking I might buy a used 18-70mm from a friend and then go with a 2.8 macro of some kind in the realm of 90mm or 105mm.

Quigley

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/13/2008 06:55:04 PM · #18

The 105mm 2.8 VR is sweet and the price just came down:)

03/16/2008 11:59:16 PM · #19

There's a rebate on the 90mm tam.
I couldn't resist â�¦ seeing IreneM's images and reading the reviews of the lens - then add the rebate in (or subtract it - 90$ worth) ... and I couldn't resist.

So: I'll buy a used 18-70 from my buddy ... then add the 90mm and I'm back in business (I never zoom in on much anyway - I verified this from looking at my portfolio).

Now ... when's the next macro challenge ;P

Message edited by author 2008-03-17 11:54:19.

IreneM