Nikon 18-300mm VR review & vs 18-200mm , 28-300mm

jogiba · 07-16-2012, 11:25 AM

Quote:

At 18mm

It's super-sharp in the center, and slightly blurry in the corners.

Laudably, it is just as good at every aperture.

At 28mm

It's super-sharp in the center, and slightly softer in the corners at f/4.

By f/5.6, everything is super-sharp.

At 50mm

It's super-sharp in the center, and slightly blurry in the corners due to what looks like curvature of field.

The corners improve as stopped down.

At 105mm

It's super-sharp in the center, and somewhat softer in the corners from what looks like curvature of field.

The corners improve as stopped down.

At 200mm

It's slightly softer at f/5.6, and somewhat softer in the corners.

By f/8, it's super-sharp everywhere.

At 300mm

It's slightly softer at f/5.6, and somewhat softer in the corners.

By f/8, it's super-sharp, with slightly softer corners.

The Nikon 18-300mm VR can replace the combination of 18-55mm VR and 55-300mm VR lenses in one lens.

This one-lens 18-300mm VR solution weighs as much as both other lenses combined, but in exchange for not needing to change lenses between ranges, costs twice as much as the pair.

Nikon 18-200 vs 28-300 vs 18-300 :

Quote:

Let's compare the sharpness of Nikon's recent super-zooms: the 18-200 DX VR, 28-300 VR and the newest Nikon 18-300 DX VR. Only the 28-300 VR is able to cover FX or 35mm, while all these lenses cover DX.

Nikon 18-200 vs 28-300 vs 18-300

rawr · 07-16-2012, 03:53 PM

Ken Rockwell....

jogiba · 07-16-2012, 05:50 PM

I will stick with my K-mount 10-24mm Tamron and 28-300 Tamron for a 30x (15-36mm & 42-450mm eqiv w/ Pentax DSLRs ) spread with two lenses compared to 16.7x with the 18-300mm.

Kahuna · 09-01-2012, 08:12 AM

Clever. What about Ken Rockwell?

**Rondec** · 09-01-2012, 08:34 AM

There is no super zoom that will match the quality of decent lenses. To say that it is a more expensive kit lens replacement that performs "just as well as the kit lens, but with more range" strikes me as silly. I replaced my kit lens because I wanted better image quality, not because I cared about changing lenses.

Anyway, for Nikon mount, the Tamron 18-270 seems as good quality and 250 dollars cheaper.

KungPOW · 09-01-2012, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by Kahuna

Clever. What about Ken Rockwell?

Sometimes all that needs to be said is "Ken Rockwell"

He is the talk show radio of camera gear.

Kahuna · 09-02-2012, 03:30 AM

"Talk show radio..."
Way cool. And what's the implication/message/point?

cali92rs · 09-06-2012, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by Kahuna

"Talk show radio..."
Way cool. And what's the implication/message/point?

The implication is that he offers "reviews" of equipment without actually testing them.
He even states that his "info" should not be taken seriously, so why she would we even read what he writes?

07-16-2012, 11:25 AM	#1
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Nikon 18-300mm VR review & vs 18-200mm , 28-300mm Quote: At 18mm It's super-sharp in the center, and slightly blurry in the corners. Laudably, it is just as good at every aperture. At 28mm It's super-sharp in the center, and slightly softer in the corners at f/4. By f/5.6, everything is super-sharp. At 50mm It's super-sharp in the center, and slightly blurry in the corners due to what looks like curvature of field. The corners improve as stopped down. At 105mm It's super-sharp in the center, and somewhat softer in the corners from what looks like curvature of field. The corners improve as stopped down. At 200mm It's slightly softer at f/5.6, and somewhat softer in the corners. By f/8, it's super-sharp everywhere. At 300mm It's slightly softer at f/5.6, and somewhat softer in the corners. By f/8, it's super-sharp, with slightly softer corners. The Nikon 18-300mm VR can replace the combination of 18-55mm VR and 55-300mm VR lenses in one lens. This one-lens 18-300mm VR solution weighs as much as both other lenses combined, but in exchange for not needing to change lenses between ranges, costs twice as much as the pair. Nikon 18-200 vs 28-300 vs 18-300 : Quote: Let's compare the sharpness of Nikon's recent super-zooms: the 18-200 DX VR, 28-300 VR and the newest Nikon 18-300 DX VR. Only the 28-300 VR is able to cover FX or 35mm, while all these lenses cover DX. Nikon 18-200 vs 28-300 vs 18-300

07-16-2012, 05:50 PM	#3
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491 Original Poster	I will stick with my K-mount 10-24mm Tamron and 28-300 Tamron for a 30x (15-36mm & 42-450mm eqiv w/ Pentax DSLRs ) spread with two lenses compared to 16.7x with the 18-300mm. Last edited by jogiba; 07-16-2012 at 06:32 PM.

09-01-2012, 08:12 AM	#4
Kahuna New Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: California Posts: 7	"Ken Rockwell..." what's your point? Clever. What about Ken Rockwell?

09-02-2012, 03:30 AM	#7
Kahuna New Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: California Posts: 7	Ken Rockwell... "Talk show radio..." Way cool. And what's the implication/message/point?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
300mm manual focus?? DA 55-300mm or SMC Pentax 1:4 300mm type	Mike C	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	03-19-2012 01:39 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax-A Lens 100macro, 135 f2/8, 200mm & 300mm	rvannatta	Sold Items	14	11-14-2011 05:57 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax smc A* 300mm f4 + K 200mm f2.5 + K 300mm f4 (Worldwide)	Fleafly	Sold Items	34	07-19-2011 01:19 PM
Fa* 300mm f4.5 review	Yann	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	02-12-2011 07:54 AM

07-16-2012, 03:53 PM	#2
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Ken Rockwell....

09-01-2012, 08:34 AM	#5
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	There is no super zoom that will match the quality of decent lenses. To say that it is a more expensive kit lens replacement that performs "just as well as the kit lens, but with more range" strikes me as silly. I replaced my kit lens because I wanted better image quality, not because I cared about changing lenses. Anyway, for Nikon mount, the Tamron 18-270 seems as good quality and 250 dollars cheaper.

09-01-2012, 10:43 AM	#6
KungPOW Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Vancouver, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,699	Originally posted by Kahuna Clever. What about Ken Rockwell? Sometimes all that needs to be said is "Ken Rockwell" He is the talk show radio of camera gear.

09-06-2012, 01:50 PM	#8
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Kahuna "Talk show radio..." Way cool. And what's the implication/message/point? The implication is that he offers "reviews" of equipment without actually testing them. He even states that his "info" should not be taken seriously, so why she would we even read what he writes?