List Price: $399.95
Sale Price: $396.95
Today's Bonus: 1% Off
I got this lens with my D90 kit. I am also a fan of Ken Rockwell, his reviews and deep expert knowledge about cameras, film and digital. Especially his expertise with Nikon over the past 30 or so years helped me a lot to be smarter about equipment and take better pictures. Ken is not the biggest fan of this AF-S 18-105 VR lens and that would naturally lead many people to caution. I have done my own comparison and truly believe he is too negative about this lens.
What I have:
Nikon D90 (SOLD great cam but I needed a better/faster autofocus system to capture fast moving kids therefore I got the:)
Nikon D300s (SOLD D my new D7000 eclipses it in every aspect)
Nikon D7000 (Simply fantastic!!!)
Nikon D40 (Sold my old trusty D40. After the D7000 came on board it was just not neccessary to hold onto it any longer0
AF-S 35mm f/1.8 prime (you MUST get this one)
AF-S 18-105 VR (This review)
AF-S 18-200 VR II
AF-S 18-55 VR D40 kit lens (sold with D40 body)
AF-S 55-200 VR (For Sale)
AF-S 70-300 VR (Tripod wildlife shots and similar; unfortunately rarely used)
AF-S 10-24 (The best and widest non-fisheye lens for DX cams. Expensive, but will hold its value. This lens is FANTASTIC and a must for any serious photographer. Save buying an expensive body, go with a D40 or a D5000 and get this lens!)
What is good about the AF-S 18-105 VR:
Very versatile! Great zoom range for most of your photography needs.
Better AF "hit rate" than the AF-S 18-200 VR
Sharp, well exposed pictures with really great colors all the time.
Still "relatively" portable for the zoom range it provides.
Probably the best bang for the buck AF-S DX VR lens!
What could be better:
The plastic lens mount is my biggest complaint and the only reason I gave it 4 stars. Nikon has to cut somewhere, I get that ... but the lens mount? C'mon ... this is a real goof by Nikon and in my book inexcusable.
The lens has a good bit of barrel distortion at 18mm, but then again all super zooms have this issue. Correct in Photoshop is easy if you must. Pincushion distortion is there but much less noticeable.
No distance range scale/window on lens. Not a must but would really be nice.
For my liking this lens already on the heavy side of the range, while probably still considered "light" for these now so popular "all around" wide range zooms. Weight is the enemy when it comes to photography. It really changes the dynamics of handling the camera and your entire photography when you have one of these fat primadonnas mounted (they actually handle better on heavy bodies like the D300s than lighter bodies like the D40 since the lighter cams get very "front heavy"). I can only imagine how it might affect your photography when you put the even much heavier AF-s 18-200 VR on you D body. This is also a reason I prefer the D90 over the D300s. I however will need the D300s for its better autofocus capabilities since I you shoot fast moving objects (= kids!). Now if you don't shoot fast moving objects ... by all means get the D90! It does really everything the D300s does IF speed (AF and FPS) is not the issue. So as you can see that personally I am not a big fan of heavy super zooms and, when needing a zoom, prefer to shoot as much as I can with the super light AF-S 18-55 VR which has also a better optical and image quality than both the AF-s 18-200 VR and this AF-s 18-105 VR. If more zoom is needed I take out the AF-s 55-200 VR which is an excellent lens while still very light. When travelling I take my D40 body (super light!) with the AF-s 18-55 VR and the AF-s 55-200 VR most of the time (these two lenses together weigh less or no more than a single AF-s 18-200 VR!). When indoors I try to use the 35mm prime because it is much, much faster than the zooms and has excellent image quality.
Front lens cap is a bit fiddly to put on as others have noted here, but that's not a biggie.
Bottom line: For those of you thinking about dropping three times as much or more on the (in my opinion) overhyped and very heavy AF-S 18-200 VR ... THINK HARD ABOUT IT and try the AF-s 18-105 out first if you need a super zoom.
I would not pay the huge premium for the AF-S 18-200 VR for several reasons:
When I compared, and contrary to Ken Rockwell's comments, I find the image quality with the AF-s 18-200 VR poorer than the AF-s 18-105 VR and all other lenses I have (above). Other technical online reviews such as dpreview also support this observation. The AF-s 18-200 has a fuzzier image and more distortion which (contrary to the AF-s 18-105 VR) is also present across a wider zoom range.
In addition ... think of it this way: With a little shopping you can get the AF-S 18-105 VR, the AF-S 70-300 VR and the must-have AF-s 35mm f/1.8 for the same or just a little more money than a single AF-S 18-200 VR lens. Even better! If you substitute the excellent but a bit pricey AF-s 70-300 VR with the fantastic and ultra cheap AF-s 55-200 VR you'll pay actually less for this entire kit than you will for a for a single AF-s 18-200 VR lens. Almost a full DX system for the price less than one AF-s 18-200 VR lens to which I would only add a super wide angle such as the new, fantastic (but pricey) Nikon AF-S 10-24mm
Unfortunately the AF-S 18-105 VR is often underrated and therefore cheap on the used market as people flock to the rather expensive AF-S 18-200 VR. I cannot duplicate the concerns around softness in the corners or fuzziness Ken Rockwell is noticing on this lens. This is an excellent budget lens for a do-it-all if you need that and a real bargain. The only real drawback being the plastic mount. Give it a try before you disregard it or get my budget Nikkor DX "system suggestion" above which is still better than either of these (AF-s 18-55 VR plus a AF-s 55-200VR). I think you'll agree with the other lens owners here!
0 comments:
Post a Comment