Tested my 18-200vr DX

[RaymondC]

<p>I was on the assumption the 18-70 is sharper than the 18-200. </p>

<p>So I did some test with the lens on the w'end. I put it on a tripod, I didn't choose the settings manually just relied on 3D matrix and single area focus on a circle mark on a tree wall kinda thing made of tree logs. Shot at 18, 50 and 70mm wide open and at f/11. </p>

<p>From what I can see from my sample, the 18-200vr was sharper than the 18-70. I don't know if I have bought the 18-200 last some months ago and it was improved or what. The 18-70 I got it used with a D70 and it produces v good images, if I not compared at 100% view, I would of assumed the 18-70 was sharper from what I read on the net. <br>

<br /> The only area the 18-70mm was better was at 70mm wide open I think. Stopped down at 70mm the 18-200vr had it, other FL and wide open or stopped down the 18-200vr had it.</p>

<p>I've read what Thom Hogan had to say about it and he says the 18-200vr is v good throughout the range incl wide open althou he didn't compare to anything specifically. </p>

<p>Regardless of the findings I am not fussed, if I go light or do landscapes sharpness isn't my concern. Other times if not that much walking, I may use f/2.8 zooms or primes. I like the 18-70 because it is a smaller lens physically and it provides good results.</p>

<p>Tomorrow for fun I may compare the 80-200/2.8 to the 18-200vr :D</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>70mm at f/11 both were the same, the 18-200vr had a v v v slight edge thou but hard to tell.</p>

 

[tri-x1]

<p>I have the 18-70 and the 18-200 VR. If I'm going strictly for sharpness I still take the 18-70 everytime, although the 18-200 image quality is remarkable considering the span it covers.</p>

[bruce_margolis]

<p>Ray, I have read here where some *think* the 18-70 is shaprer but at least one who did some testing found the 180-200 to be sharper. I suspect they are really pretty much the same, at least in the f/8-11 range. Any difference is probably because of an individual lens. At least stopped down, both are pretty good, great for walk-around use.</p>

<p>Needless to say, comparing the 18-200 to the 80-200 is night-and-day. The 2-stop difference is going to be huge, really targeting the weakest link in the 18-200. Nevertheless, enjoy the testing. That's one of the fun things about digital.</p>

<p> </p>

[liljuddakalilknyttphotogra]

<p>Ray, I had the 18-70mm kit lens with my D200. I did not like it. Traded it towards my 80-200 which was traded towards my 70-200VR.<br>

I don't know which is sharper, the 18-70 or the 18-200. I have the 18-200 & I'm pretty impressed with the one I have. It seems rather sharp. I even took a photo which was accepted at a stockphoto company & was given top honors by them. So you won't find me complaining about the 18-200 as a general walk about lens...</p>

<p>Just have fun with them & congratulations on your findings</p>

<p>Lil :-)</p>

[simon_hickie1]

<p>I found little difference in the 18-70 range covered by both lenses - with the 18-200 winning out in some situations (I need to retest now I have a D300!). However, in the 70-200 range, my 70-210mm push pull f4-5.6 (bought for the princely sum of 38 pounds) is sharper. Having said that, if travelling with only one lens, it's the 18-200 every time.</p>

[httpwww.photo.netphoto1664881546]

<p>Same boat. I have just bought a 70-200 f/2.8. Went to the christmas events with children today 2 lenses. Had to swap for different situations. Had the 18-200VR for a couple of years now and wanted to go faster for boy football weekends. What a pain changes lenses every 15mins. My 18-200VR is grreat and sharp. Better still told wife I was selling it to get 70-200 and has now forgotten. Will keep for these ocassions. Great lenses.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>I've also got both the 18-70 (shipped with the D200) and the 18-200 (I like it a lot for casual, and sometimes not-so-casual use). In real life, I find them indistinguishable-ish in their shared focal lengths... except for the fact that the 18-200's VR does things that the 18-70 can't. But I won't get rid of the 18-70, since it's a nice little lens, and OK to have around on an inexpensive backup body, or worthy in case the other lens takes a gruesome hit of some sort.<br /><br />Perhaps one of these days I'll try a semi-formal shoot-out between the two, just for fun. But it seems highly academic, and not likely to matter much in actual use (if you leave the VR out of the consideration).</p>

[mike_langieri]

<p>I'm using the 18-200VR on my D300 and I also think sharpness is not an issue at all. Maybe low light situations get tricky because it's not fast enough, but I'm amazed on what I can do in reasonable light conditions. Its a great lens.</p>