Nikon 18-135 vs 55-200mm Lens - which is a better performer?

I have both, but find 55-200's IQ to be much better than 18-135mm in my limited experience. Is this difference because 18-135 is non VR?

I have an 18-55 kit lens also. All these are for use on Nikon D3100 & D40 bodies.

If I have to change the lenses frequently between 18-55 & 55-200, will it cause lot of problems due to dust accumulation & greater wear & tear?

That is my fear; otherwise I like the combination of 18-55 & 55-200.

Please share your views.

Thank u.

Changing lenses may seem intimidating, but is part of the whole DSLR experience, and if you follow a few simple steps, you can minimize dust getting on to the sensor.

That aside, the 18-55 and 55-200 is a great lightweight kit, and usually under rated.

--
cheers,
r_k_t
http://rohanthakursphotoblog.blogspot.com

I am happy with this combination.

With a nonVR 18-135 lens, I find a large % of handheld shots are blurry.

Thanks for your comments.

If you're finding the 18-135 is blurry, I believe it is definitely you, not the lens. This lens is discontinued but it was the optical basis of the newer 18-105 VR in use today.

The 18-135 might be the sharpest kit lens Nikon has every created. It's as if Nikon told the engineers, design a lens for around $300 where you spend the effort on sharpness at the expense of any other attribute like distortion or CAs.

My gal would not let me replace hers for any other lens bar none. It's sharp, has punch and very contrasty. I've tried to upgrade her several times.

I think you must have a technique issue. You might be using a shutter speed too slow. Try to stay around 250th of a second or faster when it is set at telephoto.

You also need to make sure you're holding your camera correctly to oppose blur. The right hand should be on the right side with your finder on the shutter. The left hand goes under the lens to cup the lens. The heal of that left hand can rest on the bottom of the camera body with your fingers cupping the lens. You work the zoom with that hand underneath.

Tuck both elbows into your body snugly. Press your eye somewhat firmly against the eyepiece. You eye/neck and two arms with elbows form a complete tripod. You can also lean against a pole or wall. This technique can work as effectively as VR if you learn it well and get into the habit of not holding the camera with your arms poking out. Look at my avatar here on the forum. I was taught this in 1959 by a real pro. I was only eight.

Pay attention to good hand holding technique and shutter speeds so you will see your keepers go well up with this and all your other lenses. Your 18-135 might become your favorite lens.

As an added benefit, notice how close your 18-135 focuses. It almost feels like a macro lens. It's not but it does focus surprisingly close. You might never need a macro lens. As sharp as it is and as close focusing, this baby is a winner.
--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

I'm not saying the lens is at fault but the lack of VR. It appears to be a good lens - good DOF, smooth Bokah, Sharp images (with all the necessary precautions) - my point is compared to a VR lens, a non VR needs much steadier hands.

I agree with all the things u have discussed - like a faster shutter speed, steady hands etc., but in a given situation, I think a VR lens makes life easier & increases the success rate.

Thanks for chipping in.

sandy said:

I agree with all the things u have discussed - like a faster shutter speed, steady hands etc., but in a given situation, I think a VR lens makes life easier & increases the success rate.

Click to expand...

A VR lens does make it easier, but it also makes us lazier, at least it can make me lazier. Then we forget the hand holding lessons we've learned or never learn them.

Because of years of proper hand holding technique and using walls, benches and other stationary things, I rarely gain much with VR. I often forget to turn it on in dimmer light situations and I don't suffer from blurry images. It helps because you're not tied to VR lenses. You don't need to make that a major feature or must have when shopping glass. Besides a lot of pro-grade glass doesn't have VR. Very little of mine has it and it defaults to Off when I do have it. It is a good tool on some occasions, but it shouldn't be something one must have.

Furthermore, by mastering good technique you're not only freeing yourself from the need for VR but you're helping VR work when you do have it. I've taken portraits playing around at half a second or around there with my 85 f/1.4 that are completely sharp, even enlarged a good bit. It does take practice and time, but it's well worth training oneself. Sometimes it's just not practical to have your tripod when you need it. The only glass where I regularly use VR is 300 to 500mm and then it's still defaulted to OFF and turned on when desired. There's just no reason to have to trust in VR when you're shooting a bird at 2000th of a second.

Anyway, good luck with your excellent 18-135. You might consider reading Thom Hogans review on that lens. It's an interesting take.

http://www.bythom.com/18135lens.htm

--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

thats a great mini-tute bro, thanks for the upgrade.