Reading mode: Light Dark

18-70 vs 18-200VR

Go to last post
D

DigitalJay

Senior Member
Messages
1,509
Reaction score
31
Location
US
A question for the forum; in the comparable focal range, how does the 18-70 stack up to the 18-200?

I have both lenses. I am just looking for a general feel from the group. I am mostly interested in the wide end. Edge sharpness, CA, etc.

I am looking at this in reference to my D300. I can put together a lightweight kit with either the 18-70, or the 18-200 along with the 70-300VR would get me more than enough focal-length range for casual excursions.

I have other, "higher horsepower" lenses for serious work.

As always, your opinions are appreciated. Thanks in advance for any input!

Jay
 
Like you I have both lenses and prefer the 18-200VR for the VR, great range for 1 lens general travel, less distortion at the wide end.
 
I have both and with my copies, the 18-200 is sharper throughout the 18-70 range and just beats the socks of it at 70-200. I have compared them on 6 different nikon dslr bodies and the results are always the same. If I'm after compact carry, I use my 28-200G which is more compact and sharper than the 18-70. But if you need the wider angle, it might not work for everybody, but I'm not really a wide angle user and the 28 on the wide end doesn't bother me much.
 
Jay:
DigitalJay said:
A question for the forum; in the comparable focal range, how does the 18-70 stack up to the 18-200?

I have both lenses. I am just looking for a general feel from the group. I am mostly interested in the wide end. Edge sharpness, CA, etc.

I am looking at this in reference to my D300. I can put together a lightweight kit with either the 18-70, or the 18-200 along with the 70-300VR would get me more than enough focal-length range for casual excursions.

I have other, "higher horsepower" lenses for serious work.
Click to expand...
I guess I have to ask it -- you have both AND you say have "higher horsepower" lenses, then why can't you check for yourself? Why would you trust an internet forum or someone else's highly refined judgement or "samples"?

If these two lenses check out to be about the same for your applications, then it really comes down to the convenience factor of the 18-200, the VR or lack thereof in the 18-70 range, the relative speed of the 18-70 vs the 18-200 (which probably isn't that much different), or the extra weight of the two lens solution. But only you know whether these "secondary" factors are important for your interests.

Otherwise, all you get are rants and raves about one lens or the other --- which, of course will lead to a long back and forth about sample variation, and, nowadays, about monitor resolution ----- and suggestions to buy 3 more $2000 lenses, a sturdy tripod and head, yadda, yadda.

msc
 
Thanks for the reply; Of course I can check for myself, but it was more an idle idea than a burning need, so I thought to toss the question out for general consideration. Basically I figured (in general only) that if the majority of replies favored one over the other, there would be a greater chance my own testing should follow along. If not, sample variation and the very real potential for "pilot error" would need to be considered.

Jay
msc1 said:
msc1 said:
A question for the forum; in the comparable focal range, how does the 18-70 stack up to the 18-200?

I have both lenses. I am just looking for a general feel from the group. I am mostly interested in the wide end. Edge sharpness, CA, etc.

I am looking at this in reference to my D300. I can put together a lightweight kit with either the 18-70, or the 18-200 along with the 70-300VR would get me more than enough focal-length range for casual excursions.

I have other, "higher horsepower" lenses for serious work.
Click to expand...
I guess I have to ask it -- you have both AND you say have "higher horsepower" lenses, then why can't you check for yourself? Why would you trust an internet forum or someone else's highly refined judgement or "samples"?

If these two lenses check out to be about the same for your applications, then it really comes down to the convenience factor of the 18-200, the VR or lack thereof in the 18-70 range, the relative speed of the 18-70 vs the 18-200 (which probably isn't that much different), or the extra weight of the two lens solution. But only you know whether these "secondary" factors are important for your interests.

Otherwise, all you get are rants and raves about one lens or the other --- which, of course will lead to a long back and forth about sample variation, and, nowadays, about monitor resolution ----- and suggestions to buy 3 more $2000 lenses, a sturdy tripod and head, yadda, yadda.

msc
Click to expand...
 
Thanks all for your replies!

Jay
 
I had both lenses. I sold the 18-200 one week after I bought it, didn't like it at all. My 18-70 after it went though Nikon workshop for some calibration, I was amazed how sharp that lens became. I sold it reluctantly when I bought my 24-70 and my D700. If I had a DX camera, I would still have kept that 18-70.

-
A photograph is usually looked at – seldom looked into. - Ansel Adams.
http://www.pbase.com/bingard/galleries
 
Hi,

I too have both lenses, but msc1 has given what I think is a good reply. Here is my take. The 18-70 came with my D70, but I bought the 18-200VR when I wanted a single lens solution, such as when out with the family, skiing, sailing or on business trips.

Both are fine lenses and I really cannot tell the difference in IQ when viewing on a screen or in print, unless I look very hard. I find the 18-200 gives a little more distortion at 18mm and I find my copy of the 18-70 a little sharper, but really only when I compare similar images side by side. As I say, in the real World I cannot really tell any discernable difference. Only you can decide between faster aperture vs VR and the different FLs.

I use the 18-70 when teamed with a 70-300VR as I find they make an excellent pair having the same filter size so I only carry one spare lens cap, one Circ-Pol and one protect filter of the same thread size.

Hope that helps.

--
J.

http://jules7.smugmug.com/
 
I also had the 18-70, 28-200, and 18-200. I now only use the 18-200, mostly for convenience, but also for the weather-sealing. My old 18-70 was prone to getting dust in it, although in my case, the edge in quality went to the 18-70. I have since sold the 18-70, but the friend I sold it to is very happy with it as a replacement for his broken 18-55.

My wife has the 28-200 which lives on my old D70. Still kicking, and producing great shots. What a gem of a lens!
 
Thanks!
lanef said:
I had both lenses. I sold the 18-200 one week after I bought it, didn't like it at all. My 18-70 after it went though Nikon workshop for some calibration, I was amazed how sharp that lens became. I sold it reluctantly when I bought my 24-70 and my D700. If I had a DX camera, I would still have kept that 18-70.

-
A photograph is usually looked at – seldom looked into. - Ansel Adams.
http://www.pbase.com/bingard/galleries
Click to expand...
 
Thank you,

I suspect that when I get around to a serious test, my results will be similar. My rationale is somewhat the same as yours; I have the 18-70, 18-200 and the 70-300VR. Either of the 18mm variants along with the 70-300 would make a good combo.

I didn't even remotely think about the filter size convenience issue.

To all who replied about me testing the lenses, I agree. I did use the 18-70 extensively at a workshop a few years ago, and was very pleased at the IQ. The images were taken with either a D100 or D70, as I had both with me.

Ultimately a few minutes with both 18's will be enough to judge WA performance.

Nothing will ever beat the versatility of the 18-200 for a one-lens travel solution.

Thanks again for all the input!

Jay
jhorse said:
Hi,

I too have both lenses, but msc1 has given what I think is a good reply. Here is my take. The 18-70 came with my D70, but I bought the 18-200VR when I wanted a single lens solution, such as when out with the family, skiing, sailing or on business trips.

Both are fine lenses and I really cannot tell the difference in IQ when viewing on a screen or in print, unless I look very hard. I find the 18-200 gives a little more distortion at 18mm and I find my copy of the 18-70 a little sharper, but really only when I compare similar images side by side. As I say, in the real World I cannot really tell any discernable difference. Only you can decide between faster aperture vs VR and the different FLs.

I use the 18-70 when teamed with a 70-300VR as I find they make an excellent pair having the same filter size so I only carry one spare lens cap, one Circ-Pol and one protect filter of the same thread size.

Hope that helps.

--
J.

http://jules7.smugmug.com/
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top