Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom Lens

[rwa757]

<p>I'm considering purchaisng the Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom Lens. I have an F80 film camera and wonder if this lense will work on my camera at it's full capability. My intent is to reduce the number of lenses in my bag (28-80, 70-300, (these two were kit lenses) and possibly my 105 macro).<br>

Any advice would be helpful. Also, any advice on purchasing used or new? I bought the macro from KEH and I have been pleased with it so far.</p>

[mark_sirota1]

<p>No. The 18-200 is a DX lens, meaning it does not cover the full 24x36mm frame.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The 18-200 is a DX (cropping) lens, not compatible with an F80, which is a full-frame, film camera.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>No, a DX lens is meant for a digital camera with a smaller sensor than a film frame. You will get an image, but the corners will be missing - picture the rectangle of the negative, with a circle superimposed over it that is not large enough to cover the rectangle.</p>

<p>There are 28-200 and even 28-300 lenses that cover the full film frame, but in general any lens that is marked DX or DC (from Sigma) or DI-II (from Tamron) or anything that goes from a number under 20 to a number over 50, is not for your camera.</p>

[rwa757]

<p>OK, thanks! Now the same question, but with the Nikon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Autofocus Lens. Maybe consider a teleconverter to give me the additional focal length? The VR feature is attractive to me (hands shake a little).</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Rick,</p>

<p>that lens is more like it, but is not too terribly well-regarded by many. I don't think it'll give you better images than what you have.</p>

<p>This lens might be a better choice... http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/237-nikkor-af-24-85mm-f28-4-d-if-review--test-report</p>

<p>But if it were me, I'd just stick with what you have.</p>

[left_ayyones]

<p>You may want to consider the Tamron 28-300mm VC (Vibration Compensation). You can get it for about $600 and it is more-or-less the same range on your film camera as the 18-200 VR would on a DX digital camera.</p>

<p>There are over 50 user reviews of the lens on Amazon, and <a href="http://www.popphoto.com/Reviews/Lenses/Lens-Test-Tamron-28-300mm-f-3.5-6.3-XR-Di-VC-AF">PopPhoto </a>and other sites have also reviewed it. The main caveat with any superzoom is that the image quality and focus speed are never going to equal a zoom with a smaller range or prime lenses, so that is the trade-off that you must make for the lighter weight and simplicity.</p>

<p>Also if you get that lens there are several versions - the newest has VC and a Built In Motor (the Tamron equivalent of Nikon's AF-S)...</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>A TC on the 24-120 that already is f/5.6 at the long end and not particularly known for its sharpness anyway - that doesn't sound like a good idea. You would be better off purchasing a manual focus 200/4 instead - probably cheaper than the TC too. <br /> An alternative to the 24-120 might be the 28-105/3.5-4.5 - it also does "macro" to some extent, taking the place of your 105. But then, why would you even consider selling the 105 macro - especially since you say you are pleased with it?</p>

[tommyinca]

<p>The film version of the 18-200 Nikkor is the 28-200 G Nikkor. IMHO, consider that it is an all in zoom, the 28-200 is optically not bad, a tad better then the 18-200. Note: No VR, No in lens AF motor (no D60, D500). It has been discontined so you have to buy used. </p>

[sam_johnson5]

<p>Not well regarded by many? Who? Check out the review on dpreview.com with which I have to agree in general. For what it is intended, a general purpose single lens for travel or whatever, it is darned good. The main complaints are some lens distortion which can be readily corrected in PS if a critical result is required. No, I wouldn't use it for a paid assignment, but most of the folks here aren't up against that kind of scrutiny. I can get this mounted on a D300 plus a 12-24mm/4 and a SB-600 all in a Domke F-803, which was my size criteria. Other than the 105mm macro, I think it will easily replace the other two, assuming you don't really need the added reach of the 70-300mm. The VR works great and it focuses quickly. It doesn't have fast optics (no super zooms do), but based on your criteria to consolidate from the lenses listed, I think it would be a great solution for you.</p>