[BillLee]

Does anyone have/used this lens? Just wondering how well it performs.

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6

[RusherRacing]

I have the Tamron version and like it for the most part. Its a little soft at the extremes. I like it for the most part. It is the only lense I have but right now not sure if I need another. It works for the majority of what I want.

[Vudoo4u2]

buddy of mine has it, says its fantastic...and judging by a lot of the photos he takes...i have to agree

seems to be very good at most focal lengths, wonderful walkaround range

[BillLee]

well right now i already have the 18-55mm and 55-200mm lens. should i sell those two and get this lens? i'm not sure if this would be a good idea or not.

[Vudoo4u2]

Originally Posted by BillLee

well right now i already have the 18-55mm and 55-200mm lens. should i sell those two and get this lens? i'm not sure if this would be a good idea or not.

imo...and from various reviews ive read

the quality on the 18-200 is better than the 18-55 on its own, and the 55-200 on its own...just a matter of $

if youre willing to spend a bit more for the 18-200, its IQ is fantastic, and not having to swap lenses is another plus

[scollins]

I've got it and have used it for the majority of my shots. I only recently picked up a 70-200 f2.8, and I've rented twice previously as well. Of the 4,955 pics I've snapped on my D300, I'm venturing a guess that 4,500 of them have been with this lens.

I'm by no means a great photographer, hell, probably not even a good photographer! I've got a bunch of junk (kids soccer and some car events) on my Flickr account if you want to check it out: Flickr: scollins1868's Photostream

I think it is a great "walk-around" lens, and very versatile. If you have the 18-55 and 55-200, you'll be replacing those lenses with one that does better than either, and without the hassle of changing lenses!

I'm actually thinking about selling it so I can step up to faster glass. I just seem to need those additional stops for the type of shooting I do. I've already got a 70-200 f2.8, so I'm now looking at the 17-35 ($1,200 used), 17-55 ($900 used) or 24-70 f2.8 ($1,600 used). I just need to decide which lens to get. In other words, how much money I want to spend!

[mcss383]

If you have room to carry only one lens, there is nothing better than it available. It is not a prime, it is not a fast lens, it is an all-purpose lens that does everything very well, but not excellent.

My only complaint with it is the lens creep, but 99.99% of the time it isn't a big deal to keep your hand on it to keep it from falling.

[BillLee]

Thanks, you guys helped me choose my next lens to buy . I've heard about the lens creep that people complain about, but i don't think that's going to be a big deal.

@ Scollins i added you on Flickr. If you ever decide to sell that 18-200mm please let me know!

[scollins]

Originally Posted by BillLee

Thanks, you guys helped me choose my next lens to buy . I've heard about the lens creep that people complain about, but i don't think that's going to be a big deal.

@ Scollins i added you on Flickr. If you ever decide to sell that 18-200mm please let me know!

I've noticed a little lens creep on occasion, but nothing too serious. I'm using a strap similar to the Black Rapid now, so the lens is typically more horizontal than downward....

And I'll definitely let you know BillLee if I decide to sell it. I just have to make a decision, and stick with it long enough to not talk myself out of it!