Comments on: Maximum Aperture of the Nikon 18-200mm Throughout its Zoom Range http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263 Not a photo blog, but sometimes I play one on TV Tue, 02 Dec 2008 03:44:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.12-alpha by: Joe http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-23340 Sat, 18 Oct 2008 02:21:19 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-23340 A very useful analysis indeed. But how does the VRII feature play into this ? > I see that the 18-200mm is f/4.6 at 50mm, which is just about 1/3rd stop slower than > f/4.0 (which is 3 stops slower than f/1.4 Nikon claims that VRII gives you the equivalent of 3-4 stops. If that's the case, doesn't that mean the 18-200 at 50mm zoom can shoot in the same lighting conditions as the 50mm f/1.4 ? thanks, Joe A very useful analysis indeed. But how does the VRII feature play into this ?

> I see that the 18-200mm is f/4.6 at 50mm, which is just about 1/3rd stop slower than
> f/4.0 (which is 3 stops slower than f/1.4

Nikon claims that VRII gives you the equivalent of 3-4 stops. If that’s the case, doesn’t that mean the 18-200 at 50mm zoom can shoot in the same lighting conditions as the 50mm f/1.4 ?

thanks,
Joe

]]> by: Phil Harvey http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-18932 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:13:52 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-18932 A very useful analysis. Thanks Jeffrey! A very useful analysis. Thanks Jeffrey!

]]> by: Stefan http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-2903 Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:04:41 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-2903 My 18-200 VR arrived with focusing problems, so I've sent it to Nikon for repair. What I've found the greatest issue with this lens is the HUGE depth-of-field (a result of comparatively high F-numbers). Since shooting with this lens wide open won't yield the best of results, stepping further down from F3.5 @ 18mm to say F5.6 will give you a tremendous depth-of-field (whether this is a problem or not depends of your subject, but not having a choice is annoying). Apart from that, shutter speeds are (in most situations) counter-acted by VR, and I've found this lens to be good fun in most relaxed situations. If under pressure - such as at a wedding - my guess is that you'd be better off with the 12-24. If you've got the money... My 18-200 VR arrived with focusing problems, so I’ve sent it to Nikon for repair. What I’ve found the greatest issue with this lens is the HUGE depth-of-field (a result of comparatively high F-numbers). Since shooting with this lens wide open won’t yield the best of results, stepping further down from F3.5 @ 18mm to say F5.6 will give you a tremendous depth-of-field (whether this is a problem or not depends of your subject, but not having a choice is annoying). Apart from that, shutter speeds are (in most situations) counter-acted by VR, and I’ve found this lens to be good fun in most relaxed situations. If under pressure - such as at a wedding - my guess is that you’d be better off with the 12-24. If you’ve got the money…

]]> by: Simon P. Chappell http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-2585 Fri, 06 Oct 2006 17:50:49 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-2585 At this time I have no desire to get a larger zoom than than the "something to 70" that came with my D70, but I also had a need for a faster lens (for indoor photography at church events). I purchased the Nikkor f/1.8 50mm lens (very reasonably priced at less than $150) and so far initial tests show that it is indeed noticably faster. I may try the same tests on my 12-24 wide angle. That sounds like a fun weekend project. :-) At this time I have no desire to get a larger zoom than than the “something to 70″ that came with my D70, but I also had a need for a faster lens (for indoor photography at church events). I purchased the Nikkor f/1.8 50mm lens (very reasonably priced at less than $150) and so far initial tests show that it is indeed noticably faster.

I may try the same tests on my 12-24 wide angle. That sounds like a fun weekend project. :-)

]]> by: Joe http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-2583 Thu, 05 Oct 2006 13:25:07 +0000 http://regex.info/blog/2006-10-05/263#comment-2583 It's interesting, Jeffrey, thanks. I used this lens yesterday in a low light situation (Q+A after a film presentation in a Museum setting) and found the VR really useful -- more so that I expected. While I like this lens as a walk-around -- especially in good light -- I too am seriously considering a faster zoom in the wide end of the range (I already have the 70-200VR). It’s interesting, Jeffrey, thanks.

I used this lens yesterday in a low light situation (Q+A after a film presentation in a Museum setting) and found the VR really useful — more so that I expected.

While I like this lens as a walk-around — especially in good light — I too am seriously considering a faster zoom in the wide end of the range (I already have the 70-200VR).

]]>