[Hawk66]

I'm now the very proud owner of a D200 and need to plan which lenses to buy over the coming months.

I bought a AF-S DX 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF ED to go with the body so after a few days snapping, good or bad, this will become my reference point in terms of optical quality.

How is the above lens rated here?

The first lens on the hit list is a Nikon 18-200mm 3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S DX VR and im interested in how that would compare to the above in terms of sharpness? given that I have 18-70mm covered im also quite keen on the Nikon 70-300mmf4.5-5.6G IF-ED AFS VR but as its much cheaper than the 18-200 Im worried about the quality. I should say at this point that quality is more important to me than convenience but if all things are equal then convenience is good!

For Macro duties Ive got my eye on a Nikon 105mm F2.8G AFS-VR IF-ED

and Im also interested to know if a Nikon 80-400mmf4.5/5.6D ED VR would work well on the 200D ?


Any thoughts on the above choices, and or alternative recommendations would be very gratefully received

Thanks

Neil

[P-E]

Congrats on your new D200

I will let the Nikononians advise you on lens choices

[Charlotte]

Gonna keep an eye on your thread Neil, as I'm in the market for lenses too

PS Already congratulated you on your new camera in your initial thread

[stevemurrayphotos]

Hi Neil,

I had an 18-70 before I got the 18-200 and was very satisfied with it. It focused quickly, gave sharp images and the range was pretty effective most of the time. I went for the 18-200 because of the longer range (can't always walk nearer) and effectiveness of the VR system - its excellent. i also dropped my 18-70 on holiday, so that made me have to decide to bite the bullet.

The 105 Micro is a fine lens too, but be prepared for how big and heavy it is - make sure you try before you consider buying, the bulk will surprise you.


Steve

[Dave]

You may find this thread of use, as I had the Nikon 18-200mm for a while :- Budget prime vs Premium Zoom vs Pro Zoom lens

Only downside of such an excellent camera body, is that to make the absolute most of it you'll need high quality glass. The Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 is renowned as the Pro's choice for that focal range & from the test above you can see how close it comes to "prime" lens quality.....a great feat for a zoom lens. For most people it also probably covers the focal range they use most.

Telephoto option wise the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens is an excelletn lens, but at circa £1000 a tad expensive. My take on this was I would use this focal range less than the 17-55mm, so at approx half the amount I got the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, which I am very impressed with. I may need to reconsider a longer focal length though, or possibly invest in a 1.4x convertor instead.

For out & out pin sharp images you can't beat the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 for the money .....£80 & outperforms £1000 zoom lenses

As ever with lenses, you need to decide the type of photography you want to concentrate on, which helps decide focal lengths, speed of lenses, VR ? etc. From this you can prioritise where you spend your money.

Final thought. I've seen people spend a fortune on lenses for portraits, to then see them soften the shot in PS, as it's too pin sharp. I've seen other people use the std kit lens in the same scenario , producing just as good final shots. Sometimes the subject does not always require the more expensive lenses

Hope some of my ramblings help.

[Hawk66]

Thanks for all the tips

At the moment i'm a bit torn on what to buy next. Ive only got budget for one lens until a bit later on hence something like the 18-200 VR has a big appeal. The lens that has caught my eye however is the Nikon 70-300mmf4.5-5.6G IF-ED AFS VR. This would give me all the range I would need for the short term and would save me £200 over the 18-200.
It appears to be technically the same as the more expensive 18-200 so would I be right in assuming it would also match in quality terms?? The only downside is I would end up carrying two lenses, and would have to swap them quite a bit, but the other £200 could be spent on a 50mm prime as suggested by Dave and extra memory.


Thanks again

Neil

[Dabhand16]

I guess the question you have to ask yourself is 'Is the all in one walkabout capability of the 18-200 a better option than the longer range of the other lens?'

I suspect the answer is it depends on your intended useage.

I only have the 18-70 kit lens on my D70s, so If I go back to my film 35mm camera when I used a 24-70, and an 80-200, the 24-70 was on the camera more often than the 80-200. So my choice would be the 18-200.

Is it worth considering a used 80-200 f2.8 Nikkor to avoid duplicating the range of the kit lens? Of course, this could always be sold to offset the cost of the 18-200.