Help assessing Nikkor 18-200 VRI please

[adam_lewis5]

<p>I'm looking for some help assessing whether or not I have a decent Nikkor 18-200 VRI.<br /><br />I recently dropped it hard enough to smash the CPL. Since then it fails to focus at 200mm 9/10 times but if I back it off to about 170mm it will focus. Focus tracking seems sluggish and I haven't taken a 'keeper' using it since.<br />I'm specifically after the opinions of those who've experienced both good and bad 18-200's. If mine turns out to be a decent one then its worth spending the money to repair. If however its deemed to be mediocre then perhaps now's the time to seek an alternative.<br /><br />In order to explain why I need help assessing my lens I need to give a little background...<br /><br />I've spent the past 6 years riding around the world on a motorcycle. I initially left home with a Pro-sumer camera, a decision I soon came to regret. A little over a year into my trip (May '07) I bought a D80 and 18-200 VRI. I specifically chose Nikon because of that lens. Fast forward to September 2010 and I spent a week with a friend in LA who's a photographer for Scion (Toyota). After a weekend of shooting the Formula Drift Finals he offered me his back-up D300s for a price I couldn't refuse. I'm as delighted with that camera today as I was the first day I picked it up and I'd really like to 'release' its true potential in my images.<br /><br />Rarely do I get to see my photos on a screen bigger than my 11" Sony Vaio (1366 x768) and I've never seen one printed. I've recently begun to learn RAW and LR3 but my 5yr old Vaio is way too slow so I've had to shelve that for now (a broken screen doesn't help either!)<br /><br />I've selected a few photos with varying aperture's and focal lengths and put them in a gallery on my Smugmug site here - http://shortwayround.smugmug.com/Other/Nikkor-18-200-VR-Test-shots/21579724_pSnMgj#!i=1144636639&k=CoMhG<br>

Scroll your mouse over the image on the right to reveal 'View Size'. I've added the relevant Exif data to the caption so you don't need to look it up.<br>

All images are .jpeg's with minor tweaks to levels, shadows/highlights. I've 'zeroed' the default Smugmug sharpening.<br /><br />Oh, and my journey blog is here - http://shortwayround.co.uk/ - if anyone's interested.<br /><br />Sorry to bring up the old 18-200 question again, I know its been flogged to death!<br>

I'd appreciate some opinions as I'll be back in the US in a few weeks and that's where I'll have my lens either repaired or replaced.<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br />Adam<br>

<br /><br /></p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>The difference between a "good" 18-200 and a "not as good" 18-200 isn't in the actual lenses, materials, etc. It's on how well everything is lined up and adjusted. To the extent that anyone actually has a poorly performing one, a trip to Nikon for an alignment will make the difference.<br /><br />Your lens, should you repair it, will be on the bench in front of the same calibration routine, and should come back in tip-top shape, optically. If, that is, the repair bill is tolerable.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Why 'guess'? Send the lens in for an estimate. With Nikon, its free to get your lens evaluated and there is no charge (even for return shipping) should you choose not to repair it. So for the cost of shipping, you can find out exactly what is wrong with your lens.</p>

[iso200]

<p>My first 18-200 wasn't very sharp, but I didn't know enough about photography to tell. It fell on the floor while on holiday in Spain and smashed the CPL to bits and had trouble focusing etc.. I sent it back to Nikon, who for an extremely reasonable price returned a lens that was tack sharp. If you're not sure that it's ok, then it's probably not.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>I agree with Matt 100% - send it in for an estimate. Worst case - it will cost more than a new one to fix. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I actually LOVED my 18-200 on my 6MP D50, and less on my 12MP D90, so I subsequently sold it to replace it with an 18-70/70-300 combo which I like very much indeed.</p>

<p>That said, you describe the actual way you use this lens in great detail (thanks for that), and imho the convenience of the one-lens solution is something that your particular photography probably benefits from greatly</p>

<p>I'd get it fixed. At least send it in.</p>

<p>But if it is over about 400 or 500 to repair, I'd bag it and get the 16-85. Honestly, for the way you're using it, cropping at the long end will probably be just as good as having the 85 - 200 range. </p>

[adam_lewis5]

<p>Thanks for your replies guys...much appreciated.<br>

I didn't realise I could get a free estimate so that's what I'll do.<br>

Matt - I didn't realise that either. That makes a repair well worthwhile - depending on the cost of course.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Adam</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Nikon USA provides free repair estimates, although they do charge something like $15 for return shipping regardless of whether you choose to repair or not. I think that is quite reasonable. I can only assume that Nikon UK has similar policies. I would verify that first.</p>

[george_earl2]

<p>Very nice collection of photos, quite enjoyable browsing through them.</p>