Customer Reviews

Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II Nikkor Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon DX-Format Digital SLR Cameras

5 star:		(123)
4 star:		(43)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

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.

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've used this lens and its predecessor extensively and I've been happy with both. They are clear, accurate, and focused. You can find a zillion reviews talking about how awesome this lens. I'm going to highlight the lens' shortcomings. This is not a be all, end all lens. Don't get me wrong, this is my walkaround lens and it stays on my camera 75% of the time. But it's important to know what this lens won't do.

1. Low light. This is a problem that plagues any reasonably priced long-range zoom. If you're going to be doing much shooting indoors, at night, or twilight with this lens, invest in a good quality flash.

2. Bokeh. The majority of the out-of-focus fields look great. However, if you're shooting wide open (low f stop) and there's a lot going on in the background (long grass, trees, etc) some of the finer details can be blurred or occasionally have a weird halo look to them. It's not that big of an issue, but it does happen from time to time.

3. Distortion. Very manageable and hardly noticeable for the most part, but when you shoot things that are obviously supposed to be very straight (buildings, roads, etc)at less than about 50mm there is some pincushioning. This is easily correctable in photoshop.

4. Light falloff. In low-light and long-exposure pictures, you can clearly see some falloff in the corners. Again, hardly a big deal for most photography.

5. Weight. If you're not used to big lenses, this will take some getting used to, especially if you're upgrading from a kit lens.

6. Filters. The 72mm size is getting more popular, but there still aren't nearly as many filters available as some other sizes. There are resizing rings to compensate if you already have some larger rings, or are eyeballing something in particular.

Ok, this was not meant to turn you off of this lens, only to give you a grounded sense of what this lens has to offer. It is a great walkaround lens for everyday use. It is also a great lens for people looking to get their foot in the door with high quality lenses without having spend too much. This won't replace prime lenses, fast lenses, and superzooms. This is a perfect lens to buy if can only afford, or only want one lens. I would still hate to be without this lens. Highly recommended.

The 18-200 VR II is an all-around great lens. While it is not "the best" lens available for any single role, it stays mounted on my D90 a large majority of the time. When I don't want to haul around a bag full of gear, this is the lens I take without a thinking twice. Clearly, Nikon had to make some tough choices in balancing the features of this lens, trying to satisfy a wide range of users and applications. Here is my take on where they ended up.

This lens IS:
- Remarkably versatile with an 11x zoom factor
- Surprisingly sharp at all focal lengths
- Very good for outdoor sports in good light
- Useful for almost-macro close-up work
- Solid enough to not require kid-glove treatment
- Usable in many indoor situations with the VR system
- Reasonably sized, considering the zoom range

This lens IS NOT:
- Very fast, especially racked out
- For low-light sports photography
- A pro-level all-metal "indestructable" lens
- Well-suited for low-light shooting
- Compact or lightweight

As noted by other reviewers, the minor distortion and corner fall-off is easily remedied via post-processing software. While many use Photoshop, I recommend DxO Optics Pro software. It has very effective custom modules for this lens and many Nikon DSLRs that work extremely well.

The most pleasant surprise for me with this lens is how good it works for "almost-macro" photography. I also have the heavy and expensive Nikon 105mm f/2.8 VR Micro, which is without a doubt the sharpest lens in my bag. However, some of the best close-up shots of bees, flowers, etc that I have taken came from the 18-200, for two reasons. First, unless I am out on a "macro safari" I don't generally have the 105 mounted, so it isn't always "at the ready" for targets of opportunity. Second, with the 18-200 racked out to 200mm, it focuses about 8 inches from the front of the lens (which equates to just over 19 inches from the sensor), which provides a pretty decent close-in range. For lower light or extreme macro situations, the 105 is still the superior lens, but the 18-200 does much better than I had ever hoped for when pressed into macro service.

For the price and the quality given this is a high value lens. So it creeps...big deal. It only creeps when it is pointing down and not being held by your hand. When you're carrying it over your shoulder just activate the "anti-creep switch."

I tested the lens at home shooting boxes and other items that contain writing at 15-20 feet. You can read the small writing, enlarged. That's real-world sharpness.

I bought the lens to take pictures of people in varoius settings. The 18-200mm gives me the flexibility I am looking for...no more changing lenses to get that close-up of a kid laughing.

What finally got me to buy it were the changes made in the VRII and Scott Kelby saying: "Now, you will see some photographers in forums online saying that these lenses (18-200...he had the Nikon lens pictured in the writeup) are basically beneath them, because they're not as sharp as they could be, or they're not as rugged as the more expensive lenses, etc. Don't let that throw you. I don't know of a single photograper that actually has one of these that doesn't love it...etc. As for quality, I have a 30x40" print framed and hanging in my home, Everybody loves it, and it looks perfectly sharp and crisp all the way through."

Kelby was right.

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!

Here's my take, from an intermediate amateur's point of view.

The Nikkor AF-S 18-200mm F3.5-5.6G VRII is the most versatile walk-around lenses from NIKON:

a) where there is no need to change lenses often (dust, moisture may wreak havoc to your camera mirror or worse damage the image sensor). You might have to spend additional $$ to buy a decent cleaning kit/pen & clean it often to prevent build-up....

b) Covers WIDE-INTERMEDIATE TELEPHOTO Range, applying the Convertion Ratio of 1.5, this lens becomes effectively a 27-300mm Lens on a DX camera.

As with anything in life, there is a tradeoff to all decisions we make, Nikon did a fantastic compromise to produce this 11X optics, and that is where you need to be very careful in CHOOSING YOUR LENSES ACCORDING TO YOUR NEEDS:

1) dont expect this lens to be built like a PRO glass, like PRO weather seal nor all-metal construction, because it doesn't claim nor pretends to be.

2) dont expect this lens to be a star performer under LOW LIGHT conditions, because no ZOOM LENSES can ever match the fast PRIMES(ranging between f1.4 - f1.8), nor the constant f2.8 of PRO ZOOM LENSES with NANO-CRYSTAL COATING for less than ideal situations (concerts, moonlight, weddings, astronomy, discos, tall buildings or straight lines at the edges... etc..).

3) PRO GLASSES got less zoom range, instead they win by extra-sharpness and contrast & better f stops all the way.
But to have the same range as the 18-200mm, you'd need 3 PRO lenses: the 14-24mm($1,748.99), 24-70mm($1,699.95), 70-200mm($2,159), all of which adds it to $ 5,607.94(March 2011) & a FX Camera Body camera to take advantage of the bigger image sensors and PRO-Glass optics... Out of Reach of most amateurs, enthusiasts...

I have seen a lot of negative comments simply because those folks did not do their homework and have the wrong expectations about this lens, where their individual & specific need did not match the intended use of this 18-200mm lens. One flaw worth mentioning though, is that most copies have LENS CREEP, mine included, but as other reviewers have mentioned, as long as the lens stays at either end of the range (18mm & 200mm), they will not creep, and there's also a creep-lock.

I would HIGHLY recommend this product. The price ($699-751 Feb 2011) is a little high for beginners and amateurs, but since its intended purpose is to replace 2 or 3 lenses PLUS not having to carry a heavy bag, missed photo opportunities, wrath of group members waiting for you to change lenses, buying a 18-105mm only to need more range in a couple of years(selling the old one, then buying this one); in my opinion, all this add up to...PRICELESS...

So overall, this lens, which I own, along my D90 bought together in Jan. 2010 (I have migrated to D7000 since then), has been a life saver, it is pretty much you'll ever need in most situations(exceptions described above). The price to pay for this type of convenience, space & weight savings, not changing lenses, is well justified the investment.

And as Ken Rockwell would say, add a PRIME LENS f1.4 or f1.8 for LOW LIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY, and you are set to conquer the world...

Anyone can design a $2000 lens that is sharp and can cover a limited focal length. No one, however, to my knowledge has designed a lens suitable for a D90 or similar which can do as many things as well as this lens does at this price.
The debate rages on on the internet regarding it. The would-be popes of sharpness sneer at it, declaring the 16-85VR to be the One True Zoom. A most worthy optic, to be sure, but too short for me by half. These are the folks who have never missed a long shot because they never leave the confines of their ivory towers and get out on the dusty trail. Did I say dusty? Oh yes. Do I want to drop my pack and set a $600 lens on the mud in the rain whilst switching to my 70-300VR, which is yet another heavy and bulky item? Nay, I refuse to carry all that weight! Ken Rockwell, who as far as I can tell has never taken a hike in his life, has lately taken to snorting that the 35mm prime lens is all he will carry, and that he will move back and forth to get his shot, the way real photographers have always done. But Cartier Bresson never had a three thousand foot drop in front of him or a forty degree talus slope behind him as he attempted to capture an eagle in flight from three hundred feet away. You won't get that shot at 85mm, either, it's just not long enough. Is this feat of technology as sharp at 180mm as the 70-300VR? No, not on the long end. It has decent sharpness on the tele side. What most people don't know is that at f8, this lens is every bit as sharp as Nikon's own 10-24 super wide when both are set to 20mm. I know, because I own them both and I've done the comparison shots on the tripod and the whole bit. This is huge, because the wide end usually gets ten times the use of the telephoto end. In other words, Nikon made exactly the right set of compromises. There is distortion, to be sure, but lens distortion is now a non-issue because of DXO and other lens correction software. If you haven't yet got DXO, it will improve the technical quality of your photos far more than any possible lens upgrade could do.
If your needs are modest regarding telephoto, or if all you do is ride from place to place in the car, or take shots of the kids around the house, then by all means, switch lenses and carry the big bag. I've got one too for those applications. But if you require a single lens solution for a great many situations, where speed and weight are of the essence, if your group would hate you for holding them up while you fumble around changing lenses, if you're wanting a nice frame-filling shot of a far off critter which will tolerate no closer approach, then this lens is for you. It is hands down the best combination of size, weight and performance available, with the possible exception of the Sony NEX5 with its new superzoom lens. There's no reason for you to miss shots that the guy next to you with his little Panasonic superzoom is going to reach out and get...a very slightly less sharp picture still may be worth a thousand words!

I owned the original 18-200 VR lens and adored it. It was the only lens I ever really needed to take with me on my photo shoots and personal travel. My only real issue with the lens related to lens-creep. As an active person who is accustom to slinging the camera around my neck and taking off - the original model lens would extend itself (a minor annoyance). The 18-200 VR II has a cam lock to prevent such.

This is a phenomenal lens that takes great photographs throughout the zoom range and it has VR so there's no need for a tripod - just buy it and never worry about carrying around 2 or 3 lenses.

Check out Ken Rockwell's review - he knows his stuff and has been reviewing equipment for years! Help support his site too! You'll have to google his namd as Amazon seems to remove the link when I attach it.

This is a very solid lens that works pretty much as advertised. I use this with the D90. There are two issues that keep me from giving 5 stars.

1. The lens must be locked when the camera is angled in a lens down mode. Locked means 18mm focal length. If not, the lens just creeps out until it is at full extension, 200mm. This can make down pointing tripods shots a pain. Especially if you are bracketing and want the exposures to be identical in focal length. You must constantly check to see if it moved.

2. This lens has a very touchy manual focus mode. Very small rotations mean big moves in focus. When shooting at 5.6 f stop or so, the DOF is pretty short and focus needs to be right on the money. In addition to the touchiness of the focus ring, there is quite a bit of "slack" in the mechanism. This makes it quite hard to rock the focus in and out to hit the correct focus.

Bottom line: You are always better off in AF when the conditions permit. The AF focus is razor sharp. But, in low light, longer distance shots where the AF illuminator will not work or with low contrast shots the AF mode can be useless. Good luck getting a good manual focus if you are in any sort of hurry.