The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)

[Iron_Dreamer]

Well the thing is, I've found by analyzing the pics I've taken with the D70/18-70, that nearly all of my "keeper" outdoor shots are from 18-30mm, and quite a few of those at 18. The zoom capability actually just allows me to take pics which might seem nice in theory at the time, but come out looking like crap. I'm not sure if I will use the 12-17 range much, but I've seen enough such pictures that catch my eye to make me think that I can, if I have the capacity.

[Towert7]

Hm, sounds like you've already answered your question. ^_^

[dj_mocok]

If your shots mostly are within that short range, You can either get the 17-35mm 2.8 or 17-55mm and be done with it or maybe you can wait to see if the new Tokina 11-16mm is any good. But with that Tokina, you'll probably need at least one more lens to complement it.
But some people really "see" within wide angle (or some, telephoto), if that's the case, you might even live with just one wide angle lens with your D200.


I'm gonna wait and get the Tokina when it comes out in February (hopefully) and probably after that, I won't be getting any more lenses for awhile.

[fabool]

The 18-200 is nice. It's convenient when you have a lens that you can take a tight telephoto shot as well as almost-decent-wideangle shots.

but...

It really is a bit hard to control. I scored the same D200+18-200VR combo used and cheap a couple of months ago and I'm craving for some primes. I've never had a lens that offers this much zoom range and it's almost more trouble than it is worth. I haven't photographed that much stuff in my lifetime, so it might be just be my inexperience with superzooms - or perhaps I'm just a prime guy.

My mission is to get some old, cheap primes to complement the 18-200 and one of those wide angles (12-24, 11-16, or 10-20) as I also like to shoot more in the wide-short range. However I'm not going to get rid of the 18-200, at least not until I have something that covers most of that range. You never know when there's an excellent shot that just needs that extra bit of telephoto power that the 18-200 gives you...

Unless you have something in the 100-200 range I suggest hanging onto it for now unless you really need the cash.

[bigshot]

The 18-200 is perfect for portraits. You don't have to get right on top of the subject and intimidate them to get a nice close image. Wide angles are best for landscapes and architecture.

see ya
Steve

[Iron_Dreamer]

Well after playing around with the 18-200 today, I do think I'll keep it, at least for a while. The VR feature is even more handy that I had imagined, and fortunately, this copy has quite a stiff zoom ring, so hopefully it won't have any of those creep problems. I still think I'll get that 12-24 sometime soon, and go from there.

[GTRacer]

Originally Posted by bigshot

The 18-200 is perfect for portraits. You don't have to get right on top of the subject and intimidate them to get a nice close image.

Using a 18-200 sucks all the fun out of street photography.

[dj_mocok]

Bigshot, you really ought to try something like 85mm 1.8 (or 1.4) for portraits, then I'm sure you'd have different opinion about the 18-200mm for portraits.

Nothing can touch the likes of 85mm or 105mm (Dc or f/2.5 version) for portraits. Well, maybe 70-200mm can be included as one of the great portrait lenses, but for portraits, those 2 ranged primes are pretty much as good as you can get from Nikon.

By the way I envy you guys who live in US, you can rent high end lenses or even cameras. Here, I can't rent nothing.

[bigshot]

I'm guessing you mean full frame when you say 85 and 105... I have a 43-86 and a 125 for my F3. They're great. But the 18-200 covers that whole range, and the VR means that the slower f stop isn't really an issue. I've set a whole bunch of lenses aside since I got the 18-200. Saving up for the wide angle zoom.

See ya
Steve

[Arainach]

The 85 f/1.4 is a classic on either DX or FX sensors. Its bokeh and DoF control are to die for. The 18-200 is a nice walk-around lens, but no lens in existence, for any system, beats the Nikon 85 f/1.4 for portraits.