AF-S DX Nkr 18-200mm F/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

There have been a lot of reviews from guru to new users, so I am just try to cover some points from my 2 cents. I am a new DSLR user just purchased the D7000 with this lens. I did extensive research on the Internet prior to getting this combo. My goal is to get an intro lens while learning DSLR photography and it turn out to be a very good choice. First and foremost, there has to be some sort of compromise when it comes to any "all around" stuffs. I believed most of the negative comments I've seen here are due to the wrong expectations and lack of prior homework. This lens is in the consumer category and not designed to match those at the Pro level, both quality and price wise. And I think it does just that and some more. Basically, each and every lens have specific goals such as landscape, portrait or macro, etc. But I am not sure I am going to shell out thousands of dollar and keep changing lens, not to mention hauling the gears on vacations. I'll leave that to the Pros. One thing for sure, this lens beats any point and shoot camera hands down in terms of picture quality and even give you minor bokeh effects. So I am very happy with it. A side note, make sure you get it from an authorized dealer which will give you a 5-years warranty, Nikon is know to be strict with this. Update: tested with the "zoom creep" somebody complains about. There is no creeping up to around 50 degrees up or down. Lens does creep at straight up or down but that's normal consider the glass is heavy. By the way, good glass is heavy and give you nice pictures. Now, what are the chances that you might be shooting in those positions? At wide open or close (at 18mm or 200mm), lens appears as lock so does not creep. The only occasion I use to shoot straight up is for firework, but then I want to fill the frame with the firework action, which means it will at 200mm and the lens stays. If you get a copy that creeps below 45 degrees, you might get a bad copy. Update 2: After 3 months of owning this and taken it to weddings and landscape shooting, I can safely say this is indeed the best "all rounder". It performs very well and takes very sharp pictures 80% of the time. There is an issue with low light situations such as wedding dinner. You have two choices, get a prime such as 35mm f/1.8 or a good flash such as SB-700. With a little post processing in Adobe, you can achieve result very close to the pro level. For example, I can underexpose 2 full stops and fix it in Adobe later, that equivalent to f/1.8 from f/3.5, the lowest aperture of this lens. One more thing, I have spent awful lot of time to research and review the various lens (Nikon, Sigma & Tamron) in the past few months to figure out what if other lens I should get. I believe a lot of people are just too obsessed about the technical details and forgotten the other aspect of photography, composition, in my opinion carries a higher impact in the overall picture. By the way, if you were to compare simply the picture quality of this with wide, prime and zoom lens, that is not an apple to apple comparison. Prime lens tends to provide better quality within their own turf, with the trade off buying, carrying and changing lens all the time, not to mention the chance to miss the shot when you have to change lens.

I have been a photography enthusiast for many years, and a user of Canon and Nikon equipment since the days of the Nikon F. My comments are based on nearly 60 years of picture-taking, not lab tests. Though I have used a few lenses that may have done some particular thing better than the 18-200 VRII, this is by far the best all-around lens I have ever used. Presently my wife and I are using a D-60 and a D-90. About six months ago I bought the first 18-200 to use on the D-90, and my wife was using the D-60 with a Nikon 18-105 VR that was originally part of the D-90 kit. I feel that the 18-105 is a fine lens in terms of IQ, and is a compact design for it's range, but my wife was instantly coveting my 18-200VR. The extra reach makes a world of difference, and I believe the VR is more effective than that in the 18-105. We had a great opportunity to compare the VR capability on the violent Jungle Safari ride at Disney's Animal Kingdom. I was afraid the lurching, jouncing, swaying safari vehicle would make photography impossible, but we pressed on regardless. We were amazed that a majority of the shots were sharp and focused! Not always with the subject we had in mind, but we were also trying not to fall out of the truck! We examined these pictures carefully, and have the opinion that the "active" mode of VR on the 18-200 may have made a difference, though not by a huge amount. The higher performance of the D-90 relative to noise vs ISO may have also been a factor compared to the 18-105 on the D-60. Very impressive performance by both setups. Now you can go on vacation and take one lens. Needless to say, this "capability gap" could not continue, and I have since purchased a second 18-200 VRII for my wife's camera. If I had to be picky about anything, it would be the zoom creep. Both the 18-105 and my first 18-200 would creep if not retracted to 18mm. Yes, there is a zoom lock on the 18-200 VRII, but I rarely use it, as setting the lens to 18mm while walking around solves the problem. The second 18-200 does not creep at all, but may loosen up with time. We'll see. To me, this is in no way a deal breaker, but I felt I should mention it, since so many others have been critical of the creep. All I can say is, retract to 18mm and it will stay there. It's just not something you have to worry about. Image quality is so close to that of even my prime lenses as to be amazing for all that moving glass and machinery! Most distortions and CA's are taken care of in software, so are pretty much a non-issue. I use Photoshop, and Nikon Capture NX2, the latter being my preference in the ease-of-use department, and it understands the characteristics of the lens and camera. I even do a certain amount of pixel-peeping, and have never felt that the 18-200VR was lacking in any way. When I have a bad picture, it is the fault of the photographer, not the equipment. The pros: Focus is fast and accurate, even in poor light. Zoom range covers everything most folks will ever need. Image quality is fine throughout the zoom range. Compact for it's range. Is an absolute delight to use. The cons: Your sample may or may not creep, but so what? Though it's compact for this type of lens, it is still a lot to hang on the front of a D-40 or D-60. I asked my wife if she'd prefer a lighter lens. Not a chance! Conclusion: Would I buy another one? I already did!

There are a lot of reviews comparing every feature of the lense. They are long, detailed, but more confusing than helpful. So I'll try to keep it short. Let's say you a typical amature photographer. You take all kinds of pictures in all kinds of conditions. So what lense would be the best? You can probably live with some minor distortions but nothing gives you as much freedom as a wide range zoom. If you shoot inside a room, you really need 18 m on a low end. The smaller the number the wider the angle and the more people you can squeeze into the frame from the other side of party table. Every mm here makes a big difference. So 18 mm on the low end is pretty much a must have. On the longer end, well, the bigger the better. However, if you that also means heavier and it also means much harder to take good pictures because on a long zoom range the camera gets less light, it's sensitive to shaking hands and the lense distortion is getting worse. Also it's more expensive. So bottom line is - if you can afford the Nikon 18-200 mm lense - go for it. That will be your single all around lense and you won't feel sorry. If it's too pricey - check out the 18-105 mm one. Think about it this way - there are a lot of specialized lenses but really only a few all-around ones. So 80% people really need to choose between only 3: 18-55, 18-105 and 18-200 and the biggest factor here is how much you can afford. So it's actually not that complicated. I few side notes. It's tempting to buy a couple lenses instead of one. It looks like you're getting more for less, but in reality changing lenses is not something people do often. The extra lense is heavy, it takes time to change, every time you take a lense off, there is a risk you can get dust inside the camera - there are a lot of reasons why having two lenses is not the same as one. Other vendors. You can get much cheaper lenses from other vendors like Sigma etc. I heard mixed stories. Some people got lucky and got good glass, some were not. If you can try and buy, you may want to take a chance. But Nikon quality control is pretty good, so there is not much risk there. Protective filter. If you're planning to spend many hundreds on a lense, please, don't forget to buy a good protective filter. Something like UV(0) or clear glass. Once you try to wipe out the glass on the lense, the microscratches on surfice will cause all kinds of image defects so you should never ever touch the lense glass. The filter is way more forgiving and it can be replaced easily. A bad filter can ruine the quality, so don't be cheap, plan to spend somewhere in $50-90 range. And finally, why would you not buy this lense? 1. Price. Most people say this lense is nice but too expensive. Since there are new better camera bodies for the same price coming out pretty much every year and the lenses hold value very well I'd suggest you to consider buying the best lense you can afford and maybe saving a bit on a cheaper body. The lense will likely outlast the camera. 2. Weight. This camera is heavy. No DSLR will fit in a pocket but this lense on a camera will require fairly large bag to carry and holding it on your shoulder for a day could literally be painful. There could be some other reasons like if your requirements are very high and you need some specialized or professional grade lenses but if you're requirements are that high, I don't think that review will open your eyes anyway. Hopefully this review will help you.

I believe it was Thom Hogan who described this lens as not perfect but really good at everything. That's the review in a nutshell. This is what I would term a prosumer lens. It certainly is not cheap yet it does not have the build quality of Nikon's top-of-the-line. The barrel, for example, is plastic rather than metal. I fear that a drop would be catastrophic and even a hard bang on the edge of a table might do serious damage if the lens was fully extended. On the other hand, this lens is a lot less expensive than those in the Nikon pro line. In addition, the lens is much lighter and easier to carry than it would be were it made entirely of metal. It is my understanding that the only meaningful difference between this lens (the VR II) and its immediate predecessor is the addition of a cam lock to prevent lens creep. My own sample doesn't creep at all, even with the cam unlocked but apparently that has been a significant irritant for a number of buyers. The use of "VR II" in the name is potentially misleading because it may lead shoppers to believe that the VR system has been improved over the original model. This is not the case. Both the original 18-200 and the new version contain Nikon's second generation VR system. Some have suggested that Nikon's marketing is a bit shady on this point while others counter that the "II" simply designates a new model. Sharpness is less than absolute across the entire range but more than adequate for anything that an amateur, or even most professionals, is likely to need. There is mild to moderate distortion, more marked at the focal length extremes but scarcely visible in the vast majority of images and readily correctable in Photoshop, DxO, or other post-processing software. Contrast is crisp and I find the lens surprisingly free of flaring and ghosting. No one should buy this lens thinking that it will make him/her a better photographer. Good photography is in the mind and the eye, not in camera. What the 18-200 will do, though, is provide a one-lens solution to the great majority of focal length needs, minimizing the need to tote a hefty bag full of lenses. It happens that, as a long time Nikon user, I have such a bag. Despite all the choices at my disposal, my 18-200 probably stays on my camera 85-90% of the time. Folks who are obsessed with numbers, charts, and MTF curves will probably fret over the 18-200, taking delight in pointing out every little defect. For the rest of us, the only significant downside that I see is that the lens is not ideally suited for extended service in rough environments or adverse weather situations. Since most of us seldom shoot in such circumstances, this should not be much of a problem. I heartily recommend the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G AF-S ED VR II (whew! what a mouthful) to any advanced amateur or professional seeking a highly usable wide range zoom.

Let's just get to the punch: this is a great all-purpose walk-around lens. It has generally good sharpness throughout the range, it has a GREAT range, has a pretty wide end, and, to boot, is relatively reasonable in price. Yes, you can quibble about barrel distortion at certain zoom levels, can probably find some image softness at certain points, and, yes, there is a bit of lens creep once you get the lens broken in, but if what you are looking for is a single lens that lets you walk around and concentrate on learning how to compose and shoot photos, this one is hard to beat. I have had the lens for a few weeks now, and have shot both indoor and outdoor (I am using the lens with the new Nikon D7000), and have been startlingly pleased with the results. The D7000 tends to overexpose in outside shots, but that's not the fault of this lens, which really does a good job of handling its whole range from 18 to 200 mm with little lens flare, overall good sharpness, and just generally good image quality. It's not going to outperform a prime lens, but I might have to assume that anyone even investigating a zoom lens like this one understands the optical compromises which must be made in order to produce a lens like this. Having said that, with some finessing and the right technique, you can churn out some pretty impressive shots with this lens, both indoors and out (the aperture maxes at f/3.5, but if you are using one of the more modern cameras, this limitation can be somewhat overcome by increasing ISO, something the D7000 does admirably). The lens is a tad on the heavy side, but nothing like the constant f/2.8 units that are on the market: this one you can carry around all day, that is, once you get used to it's reasonable weight. Constructional quality seems good (my unit was manufactured in Thailand), including a solid feel during zoom and manual focus operation. Auto-focus is acceptably fast (although we still have the sluggish live view focusing performance, even on a camera like the D7000) and acceptably quiet. The unit has switches for vibration reduction (on/off), manual/auto focus, lens lock, and also auto focus aggressiveness (normal or active). The lens is supplied with both a front and a rear plastic cap, as well as a soft fabric bag for when you are not using the lens. Not using the lens? Most people who look into a lens like this will probably attach it to the camera, and leave it there for the vast majority of the time. As I say, you can quibble over a few items, but many of these are addressed with simple software adjustments (sharpness, barrel distortion, etc.), and so I can't say that the average photographer should worry about these too much. My own shooting has been quite good so far, and after my initial few weeks of field testing, I would have little hesitation recommending this lens to the enthusiast and/or lay photographer who just wants to take photos and learn the craft a bit more. There is an important place for prime lenses, tilt-and-shift lenses, and even fish-eyes, but for the general Nikon enthusiast, this is one of the great lenses to have come out in recent memory. Five stars, especially when you consider the price.

I would consider myself an advanced amateur in photography. I have been shooting pics since 1976, using a variety of cameras. I started with the Nikon F2A, and I have progressed to the D300. A diverse group of Nikon lens have accumulated also. My last purchase was a Nikon 28-200 in the 300 dollar range. The 28 was just not enough for wide angle shooting. Thus began the search for more. I had read the reviews for the 18-200 VR, and it seemed to be the answer. Except for one thing: the price. But, I gave in and made the purchase. Smart move. This one lens replaces almost all my existing inventory(save the 70-300). I have shot a couple hundres pics, and any doubts are now gone. Yes, the price is pretty steep for the average Joe, and there is that much talked about lens creep in the middle range(around 135). But I don't shoot a lot of pics straight up or down. Probably most others don't either. The build quality is high. The lens tube is plastic,but appears to be of a very high quality(it is hard to tell it is not metal). And for a first time user, the VR is amazing. Seems almost like magic. The most impressive quality to me is the clarity and color rendition. This lens is better than any previous Nikon product I have owned, hands down. Some of the reviews have questioned the sharpness. No problem here. Again, it outperforms all my other lens. Unless you are incredibly demanding, I think you will find this to be the lens to leave on the camera almost 100 per cent of the time. I have. I would heartily recommend this product. The price is higher than average, but it will replace 2 or problably 3 of your current lens. No toting a box or bag to carry all of them. And the weight is not an issue for me. For what you get in one lens, it is well worth a few extra ounces on the camera. Buy this and move on. I don't think anyone will regret it. I didn't.

the lens is good although I’m giving three stars due the lens was advertised as mint condition when is not had few scratches on the barrel probably was dropped and the lens you can see a bit of dust inside also it took over 12 days to be delivered that’s was a bit too long

This is my second of these, as my first one was crushed a few months ago. I had it for 13 years and had it not met an unfortunate fate it would have worked another 50, I have no doubt. I put my equipment through its paces. I do not baby it and I carry ready to shoot at a moment's notice. This lens does not disappoint. Ever. It works in 99% of situations without loss at the edges. Between this lens and my Nikon d7500 I get everything I desire. Fast shipping, new quality, and seller seems legit.