Nikon 24-120 VR vx 18-200

[john_clark24]

<p>I am purchasing a D300 and have a Nikon 24-120 VR. Is it worth buying an 18-200 as a walk around lens?</p>

<p> </p>

[seanbreadsell]

I own a 18-200 on my D90 and it is excellent, quite sharp in good lighted situations. It's distorted at 18mm quite bay but I this

k that's Photoshop fixable (no idea how). I heard and read reviews that the 24-120 had fairly bad image quality compared to

other lenses but I am sure the experts can confirm that or not.

[rick_marquez]

<p>I wasn't a big fan of the 24-120VR... It's pretty so so... I wouldn't say bad but I was never ever blown away by it...<br>

I sold it pretty quick...<br>

Got the 18-200VR shortly after getting rid of the 24-120VR...<br>

This is by far the coolest walk around lens out. Really nice crispy sharp images. You have a great body with the D300 and the 18-200 would be a better choice in my opinion.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Are you happy with your lens? Why do you want to upgrade? If you like to shoot a lot on the wide and/or long end and money is not an issue, the 18-200mm could be a nice change for you. Another option is to keep your 24-120mm and invest in an ultra wide like a 10-20mm or 12-24mm if you like to shoot on the wide end and/or a stronger zoom like the 70-300mm VR if you like to shoot on the long end. If you have a Nikon dealer near you, you may want to try it out on your camera and shoot similar shots with both lenses and compare the images yourself.<br>

I own the 24-120mm and like it a lot. I have also owned the 18-200mm and liked it a lot too. Aside from the slightly expanded zoom range, I found no difference in IQ between the two (after PP). If you plan to upgrade to FX in the future, you may want to consider keeping the 24-120mm.</p>

 

[beac]

<p>My two cents: Depending on your style, the 18-200 is hard to beat for a 95% solution. I know lots has been said about it here, but at the end of the day even its detractors admit it is a great lens for its market and the quality is fine...certainly better than the 24-120 from what I read. <br>

I sold my 18-200 along with my D80 so I could get a D700; absolutely no regrets since the D700 is amazing, but I'm back to working with the old version of the 24-120 (from my film days) and am frustrated by its quality.<br>

On the good side, I've been using my 50mm 1.4 a whole lot more....<br>

I think you will be quite happy with the 18-200.<br>

Saving up for some better glass myself now. Probably used 80-200</p>

[hudspeth]

<p>Hi John, I also like the 24-120VR on a D3. To get the best from the lens I used the focus adjustment on the D3 and that works quite well. I would try that before switching to the 18-200.</p>

[edwin_walke]

<p>I have both of these lenses and think they are very good. I use the 18-200 mostly on my D300 and the 24-120 on my F100 and F5. I have read the reviews and quite frankly do not see any issues with either lens but I don't earn my living taking pictures either. I have used the 24-120 on the D300 and I am quite satisfied with the quality of the images. They don't quite match up to the more expensive glass like the 17-35/f2.8 Nikkor and the 80-200/f2.8 but given the difference in cost one wouldn't expect similar performance.</p>