PDA

View Full Version : Good Alternative to Nikkor 18-200VR?



tfa8rva
10-02-2008, 08:04 PM
I'm looking for a less expensive alternative to the Nikkor 18-200VR. Can anyone provide with some suggestions?

Thanks.

Visual Reality
10-02-2008, 09:34 PM
The Sigma 18-200 and Tamron 18-250.

The Nikkor is quite a bit better though.

500mL
10-02-2008, 11:04 PM
I bought the Sigma 18-200 OS HSM and I was happy with it. I'm actually selling mine now since I just recently purchased a Sigma 10-20 and Nikkor 105mm VR Micro. But it's a good alternative for the Nikkor 18-200 VR, although as Visual Reality mentioned, the Nikkor is quite better than the Sigma.

Esoterra
10-02-2008, 11:18 PM
If you ever get a FX Nikon, the Tamron 28-300 VC is better than the Nikkor 18-200. Do a search at DPreview.com for more info.

XaiLo
10-02-2008, 11:35 PM
If you ever get a FX Nikon, the Tamron 28-300 VC is better than the Nikkor 18-200. Do a search at DPreview.com for more info.

Seriously? I'll check that out.

e_dawg
10-05-2008, 12:39 AM
I disagree that the Nikkor is quite a bit better than the Sigma. I'd still prefer the Nikkor, but the Sigma is not that far off.

The Tammy 28-300/VC is indeed a better choice if you're planning to use this lens on a future FX body (as most other superzooms are DX format lenses), but the problem is that it is not wide enough at 28 mm.

I'd suggest you look at the Tamron 18-270/VC, which is a DX format lens but is supposedly better than the 18-200 and 18-250 that preceded it... and it has Tammy's VC image stabilization system.

tfa8rva
10-05-2008, 02:31 AM
Thanks for the suggestions. That Tamron 18-270 sounds like it might fit the bill. Any idea when it will be released? I really want a good walk around lens that I can take with me when carrying several lens around is not convenient.

aparmley
10-07-2008, 06:37 PM
IMHO a replacement for that lens, would consist of two lens that cover 18-200mm. Otherwise, you just splitting hairs aren't ya?

fionndruinne
10-07-2008, 06:45 PM
A 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4, 105mm f/2 and 180mm f/2.8.:cool:

A much higher quality setup.

Visual Reality
10-07-2008, 07:05 PM
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Sigma 18-50 f/2.8

+

Nikon 70-300 VR

e_dawg
10-07-2008, 10:15 PM
Sure, if the OP is open to 2 lens setups instead, that would be a great suggestion. We both have that setup.

Here's my recommended list of sorts for a 2 lens setup:

Wide / Standard Zoom

Sigma 10-20
Tokina 12-24
Tamron 17-50/2.8
Sigma 18-50/2.8
Nikon 18-55/VR
Nkon 16-85/VR
Nikon 18-105/VR

Tele Zoom

Nikon 55-200/VR
Nikon 70-300/VR
Sigma 70-300 APO (if you're on a strict budget)

IMO, you could pick one lens from each list and put together an excellent combo to cover every focal length you would usually need with better quality than a superzoom. But, if a superzoom is what you need, the Tamron 18-270/VC would be at the top of the list depending on initial reports.

If you still like a single lens solution and are willing to settle for less focal length range, Nikon's new 18-105/VR is actually a pretty good lens and is optically one of the better wide range zooms in its class. They basically took the 18-135 and tweaked it to address its weakest aspects (distortion at 18 mm, CA, and no VR) to get the 18-105/VR. And that's actually a good thing, because the 18-135 was one of the sharpest consumer zooms for every aperture throughout its focal length range Nikon ever designed.