"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...
Nice resolution, from edge to edge. Is that a true Nikkor, or one from

another mfr. that they put their name on? I'm looking for a similar
lens.


Max, as far as I know Nikon only rebadges the 70-300G lens and some of
their Chinese built lenses have poor build quality, but most others are
true Nikkors. The 18-200VR seemed too good to be true, but it does have
some issues. Distortion at the wide end,

They all have that. 18mm is really at the short end of wide angle,
bordering on a fisheye. That said, I have seen a 14mm lens with almost no
distortion, but it also costs over $3K and weighs a bloody ton.

some light falloff in the
corners and it's not as sharp as my 1700 dollar 70-200VR lens of
course.

Of course not. But for 99% of applications it's pretty tough to beat at the
price. I paid over $1200 for a single focal length 300mm Nikkor lens about
20 years ago. It's superb, but I almost never use it anymore, thanks to
being long, large diameter, and too bulky to carry around. I use it to
photograph astronomical stuff almost exclusively now, which means it never
leaves my yard. Modern, compact, inexpensive zoom lenses have all but
replaced dinosaurs like my old 300.

But for general photography and a travel lens it's the best
lens on the market. My copy is sharp and contrasty. Bokeh is somewhat
poor, AF is very fast. It's a small lens, but it more than doubles it's
length when zoomed to 200mm. It's also capable 1:4 lifesize close focus
at 12 inches!!! It's really an amazing lens. Cost is around 750.00.
They are very hard to get with a long waiting list at present.

Our local camera store has two of 'em, but the price is a bit higher. I'm
not in a hurry, so I may wait. I've been scrutinizing that lens for a
while. Nice to talk to someone who has one.

Max

Our local camera store has two of 'em, but the price is a bit higher.
I'm
not in a hurry, so I may wait. I've been scrutinizing that lens for a
while. Nice to talk to someone who has one.


Just remember it's not a "pro" lens, though I suspect a lot or pros
will buy one anyway. My 70-200VR is a lot like your 300mm. It's huge,
but the sharpness at 2.8 is amazing and the bokeh is beautiful. This
was shot with it for that creamy background (and the 18-200vr will not
pull this off of course)...

http://members.aol.com/bobsprit/images/parkbaby2.jpg

But I can't carry that monster of a lens everywhere I go. This angle
makes it look more manageable than it is...

http://members.aol.com/bobsprit/images/aagrip1.jpg

I also ordered a Tamron 90 Macro, which is an amazing portrait lens and
superior to the Nikon versions.
My main reason for the 18-200 was as a lens for the boat. Remember that
a DSLR has a crop factor of 1.5, so the 18-200 actually acts like a
27-300mm. I had a Tokina 12-24 for a while...gave it away, and will
probably buy another.


RB
35s5
NY

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...
Our local camera store has two of 'em, but the price is a bit higher.
I'm
not in a hurry, so I may wait. I've been scrutinizing that lens for a
while. Nice to talk to someone who has one.


Just remember it's not a "pro"

. . . nor am I.

lens, though I suspect a lot or pros
will buy one anyway. My 70-200VR is a lot like your 300mm. It's huge,
but the sharpness at 2.8 is amazing and the bokeh is beautiful. This
was shot with it for that creamy background (and the 18-200vr will not
pull this off of course)...

http://members.aol.com/bobsprit/images/parkbaby2.jpg

But I can't carry that monster of a lens everywhere I go. This angle
makes it look more manageable than it is...

http://members.aol.com/bobsprit/images/aagrip1.jpg

I also ordered a Tamron 90 Macro, which is an amazing portrait lens and
superior to the Nikon versions.

Interesting. Last time I chatted with my local Nikon guru, he said that
many of the newer Nikkor lenses are made by Tamron, and some other mfrs.
His claim was that only the most expensive Nikkors were made by Nikon any
more. I have a 70mm lens that I've used for portraits. It's an older Zeiss
(I have to use an adaptor to use it with my Nikon body) and its superior to
any other lens I own, except my other Zeiss (180mm) and a really old Leitz
that just sits in its case, never used.

My main reason for the 18-200 was as a lens for the boat. Remember that
a DSLR has a crop factor of 1.5, so the 18-200 actually acts like a
27-300mm. I had a Tokina 12-24 for a while...gave it away, and will
probably buy another.

Do all digital SLRs have that same factor? I wasn't aware of that.

I've got an old Minolta fisheye (4mm) that I have no use for, but wish I
could use it with my Nikon body. I can't find an adaptor for it, and would
like to sell it and buy something around 12-24 for those wide-angle shots
that I can't get with any of my current lenses. Maybe Ebay.

Max