Nikon 18 - 200 VR for Weddings?

I have read some good reviews on this lens and was starting to think

about purchasing as it would mean I never have to change lenses

during a wedding.

 

Although it has the VR capability I cant get over the fact that it

is still SLOW at f/3.5-5.6.

 

Am I right in thinking that the VR may assist with camera shake in

low light but it wont help if your subject happens to move.

 

I imagine less light wouldnt assist the AF either.

 

Has anyone tried this lens that can report on it?

<Am I right in thinking that the VR may assist with camera shake in low light but it wont help if your subject happens to move?> That's right, effective for camera-shake only, bright light or low light...you'll need the taser version to get your subject to stop moving...nudge-nudge ;)

 

Could we impose on an owner of this lens to provide some useful info? It would be helpful to know at which focal lengths, as the zoom collar goes from 18 to 200mm, the max aperture becomes 4, 4.7 and 5.6. I bet more than a few people will be surprised by the answer.

Read Popular Photography review of this lens, April 2006 issue, page 67.

 

This is clearly not a proffesional grade lens, in their opinion, especially at 200 mm end, it gives great pictures up to 5x7", then at larger sizes the quality is reduced as per "Subjective Quality Factor", that is if you can trust the Popular Photography.

 

Most lens tests gave better results, when looking back through few years of reviews there. But you cannot compare different ranges and types of lenses, perhaps.

I too, am considering adding that lens to my kit. It would never be my only lens. That

would *never* work. I would only use it for low light situations at short focal lengths that I

know I need a longer shutter speed than what I can hand-hold with my faster 2.8 zooms

or 1.8/1.4 primes.

 

That, and I'll have the gorgeous Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR for any longer focal length shots

requiring long shutter speeds. I'm not sure how well it would be able to focus with so

little light coming in. It'll also make your viewfinder pretty dark at 5.6!

 

Now that I think about it: I think I would only use it at receptions, with flash, to get more

ambient light in. Again, only on shorter focal lengths. I'll be wearing 2 D200 bodies with

me most of the time.

 

Here's my current setup:

2 - D200 bodies ( I *LOVE* this camera!)

Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR

Sigma 24-70 2.8

Sigma 30mm 1.4 HSM

Nikon 85mm 1.8

Nikon 18-70 kit lens (much quieter than sigma 24-70, but vignettes badly!)

 

Bottom line, I think the 18-200 could be usable, but only in certain situations. I think only

testing would we be able to find out those situations. There is no substitute for fast glass!

 

~Aaron Lee

I have one. I tried using it once, then gave up on it. For indoor shots it simply spent too long trying to autofocus, probably a result of its minimum aperture. It's probably good for outdoor work.

By the way, mine is for sale. Used once. Contact me if you're interested.

Suuure ;-)

I think you have sold me Edward - not to buy one that is. According to Fred Mirandas review you should be able to sell it for a good price.

And don't get the Sigma 24-70. I've had one for a while but it doesn't meter correctly with the D200! If you buy it you may have to send it in immediately for an upgrade.

 

I just don't seem to have any luck with zooms.

If you do a lot of beach weddings or in a garden-type wedding area, the lens probably would be fine.

 

 

 

In a dark church, the steady use of 1/15 second (or slower) to get enough light on a group to have the lens closed to f11 would be a nightmare. Any movement of a flower girl or ring bearer would nix the image. Nikon has a number of f2.8 (and faster) lenses for a reason.