After watching your D7000 video I took the plunge and entered the hobby and bought a D7000. And again after watching this video, I bought an 18-200mm as my first and only lens. So happy i did. It allows me to hit just about any shot I can think of. No matter the situation I’ve got what I need. Thank you for helping me make an informed decision when buying my first setup. You changed my life.
Great video 👍. Most people a trash talker anout DSLR mirror and saying only mirrorless are worth buying. Not good for the price of mirrorless . Even entry level D3100-D3500 are pretty good .
I've always loved photography, and since watching your videos you've inspired me to take it seriously, I first started to take photos of food! After watching your videos, you've inspired me to take it further. I've just ordered this lens and can't wait for it to come in. Another great video brother! Keep them coming!
These things are tough as old boots. Mine got hammered in my motorcycle tank bank on two trips around Australia, and was still going strong until it got stolen. Takes great pics too, and so versatile it saved me from not having to get off the bike to take photos. My fave lens. I think i need another one 😁
Ah, that's truly unfortunate that yours met it's fate by a thief :( After all of it's adventures you had with it. Hopefully you can get one now since you could find a few for a very nice price (as long as it's in good condition!). Appreciate you for sharing your experiences with it!
@@BoostLeekdMedia It's also a very nice fit for the Z50. I went from a D5200 and had a real nice set of DX glass that works great with the FTZ adapter.
Do you find the autofocus on this lens faster on the D90 or adapted on the Z? I've always wondered if with new cameras, do older/adapted lenses work even faster. 🤔🤔 Thanks for these videos, super helpful! Subbed!
Autofocus speed is definitely depends on the camera body. I had the 18-200 on my Z50 and it was faster compared to the D90 because the Z50 does have better tech in it compared to the D90. I think it's just slightly faster on new cameras because the new cameras have better tech.
I got it for $90 & thought I was Bamboozle. But most go from $100-160 . Some are $79 but who knows if they work. I had a chance to test before I purchased it . Beautiful ❤ 📸🎞️🖼️.
I've had this lens for years with my Nikon D5200. It has been great for thousands of photos, especially travel. It just broke, possible loose flex cable inside so probably expensive to fix. Now looking for a replacement!
I bought this when my 18-105mm broke down but was disappointed. Compared to the 18-105mm it wasn't as sharp, so I ended up selling it after just a week ( may be I bought a bad copy). Later bought the 18-140mm which was as good or better than the 18-105.
Versatility wise it's a great lens, and for 100 bucks it's a good score.👍. I used that lens on my d90 in Japan and the only time I switched was maybe to go a little wider with my tokina 11-16. Great video too sir.!!
I have the Sigma 10-20mm as well and it's a great ultrawide. I recently bought the 18-300mm. It's range is insane and picture quality is generally pretty good. It can be a bit soft at the long end at 300mm along the edges. Not much that you can do about that with a superzoom. The kind of lens and physics will always exhibit some things like that. It has some distortion but you can easily fix that in camera or via camera raw/post processing. But it is insanely versatile. I took my Sigma 10-20 along to Ireland. It was great but I did kind of grow tired of having to switch lenses. And being on a bus trip, there were times where I missed a potentially great shot entirely.
Why are people complaining about sigma 10-20 and saying Nikon 10-20 is better. I like both , I don't have them but both give good images. I have the 18-200 and cant remember if I paid $70 or $90 but not bad , I thought 🤔 I got Bamboozle. 😆. Under $100 is ok I guess
@@arianduran1725 could be for a variety of reasons. There is also an element of brand loyalty that could be at play. Any lens may have some quirks or flaws. Some lenses will naturally perform better than others. But in my opinion using the Sigma 10-20 on my trip to Ireland I found it to be a competent and decent lens that yielded some great shots. The next lens I would like to get is the Nikon 200-500. Its a toss up between that sigma and tamron. But thats a much more expensive lens.
@Linkman247 I love my Sigma 10-20mm and it's almost always on my camera. I know I'm coming to this comments section late but I just traded in my 200-500. It's super fucking heavy and on a Z body then you have the added ftz adapter added to it. It's not practical for handheld photography. I traded it in towards the new z mount Tamron 50-400 and it's GREAT. so if you haven't gotten that 200-500 yet I'd def put your eyes on the new Tamron z mount
@@melissasassmann3082 i have not yet purchased the 200-500. I like my 18-300. But there are times and subjects that are simply beyond the range of the 300. Largely birds and smaller wildlife that are not always the most coopersting subjects lol. Im looking for a more dedicated wildlife lens. The 200-500 you can find a bit cheaper preowned. Your point about it being heavy and the Z mount with adapter is worth considering. Especially since I shoot with a dx body which uses an f mount. So if I would ever look to go to a z-body i would also need that same adapter. Nikon also has a 80-400 but its almost $2,000 (new) versus the 200-500 $1,400 (new). The 200-500 can be found for $798 used. Im sure tamron/sigma are probably cheaper. I have read good things about the tamron 100-400. PaulRoedding has a extensive review with some impressive shots. He notes the lack of a tripod collar but the lens is easy enough to shoot handheld. Ken Rockwell has a number of reviews and his big caution with tamron is that it is made in China and to make sure the serial on the zoom ring matches the serials on the top of the box and warranty papers and has the holographic sticker. While you can't fix cetrain things in camera since Nikon doesnt support off brand, you do have photoshop. Thats true of Sigma as well. Definitely something to consider. Ive been kind of price shopping. I didn't mind shooting 3rd party lenses like I said i love my Sigma 10-20. And like the reviews note the Tamron still can deliver good images at a lower price. The only comparable option from Sigma I have seen is the 150-500 ($871) new vs the Tamron 100-400 f/4.5-6.3 ($644 new) but it doesn't come with a warranty. Since you shoot the Tamron on a Z body with adapter you haven't had any compatibility issues? I appreciate your comment and hey if I can save some money and still get decent images I cant complain.
I have! I brought that combo with me to a weekend trip and loved it! With the 18-200, you will need to use that lens in broad daylight, or with a lot of light sources, to get good quality videos because if you are using that lens during the evening (and you're in Auto mode), the camera will make adjustments and the video will be grainy. Just make sure you're recording during the day and you'll be fine. I hope this helps.
Thanks! I had the 18-140 a long time ago but sold it to get a 50mm F/1.8G. It was a fabulous lens. Kinda regretted selling it but, at least I have the 18-200 now. And yes, I've heard good reviews about the Tamron 28-200 as well. It's one lens I'm considering for my D700. Thanks!
I've watched several of your videos. I still use my Olympus gear. I mainly use my Zuiko 50-200mm f2.8-3.5 for what I shoot. What would be a good telephoto for a nikon d7100? I'm not too familiar with Nikons lenses. Could you give me two other options besides the 18-200. Thanks in advance.
Depending on your budget, a used 200-500 is actually an amazing lens. If that's above your budget, a 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6G VR is an excellent lens. There are 2 models, the 1st model is one I'd recommend for the D7100 since they're falling in price as well.
Hey brother, I finally received my d40! 😸. Is it possible if you could please make a video how to use it with examples and differences with photos along with the 3 main settings (aperture/SS/ISO). The lens I have us AF-S NIKKOR 18-55mm. Thanks 👍🏼
@@BoostLeekdMedia Sounds good I will! Thanks I appreciate it! 😁👍🏼 Been playing around with it for abit got some okay photos, nothing decent yet 😂. Some came out dark/blurry, but it's okay still learning how the adjustments work on photo situations haha. Been alot of help, Thanks bro 👍🏼
Nice video. I am not an experienced photographer. I have a Nikon D3300 and I purchased this lens bc of it's flexiblity. I purchased it from MPB, online shop, used. For some reason, after taking about ten pics or so, the auto focus seems to freeze and the camera will not shoot. Any ideas as to why this might happen (other than malfuncioning lens, it was purchased used)? Thank You
There are a few factors that could be the issue as I ran to a similar problem. It was the battery. The battery I was using was not the original Nikon battery. I hope this helps! That lens should work on the D3300 though.
I’m considering buying it for my D7000 but have few questions. (1) since most reviewers say it’s not for sharp images, do you recommend for wedding and events ? Else can you suggest alternatives if cost is not a factor but compatible with D7000. (2) you bought yours used? Would recommend used lenses considering that D7000 is old and I need a lense for now with the hope of upgrading the camera later
I wouldn't recommend it for paid weddings or events. BUT, if you're at a wedding or event and you have permission from the party to take pictures, it's a good lens to play with but again, it won't produce super sharp images, especially if you have limited light. I would suggest a 70-200 2.8 or the Sigma 50-100 F/1.8. Yes, I bought my 18-200 used. I just bought a Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 that I love using on my D7000. Here's my review on it: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-uh1E3ojiq4M.htmlsi=zYylYzTeoYSIlu4S I hope this helps!
I ended up getting the tamron 18-270mm back in 2011 since the nikon one was alot more money then. I wonder if its better then the tamron one? tamron one still works. being I got new batteries for my old D3000 I am going to keep using it atleast another year. maybe just get another lens and keep the old body for now. Cheers
I also saw that Tamron 18-270 as well. Wasn't sure if it'd be as good but that extra reach is nice. Glad to know you're still using the D3000. Thanks for sharing!
I use this lens for my D750 full frame body. Although the lens is DX my D750 body will convert to DX and my pictures come out nice. My only concern is that the MP will go down to only about 10 MP. Would that be a problem (in terms of images that lack quality or detail)?
I've used this lens on my Z6 (that will automatically crop to DX mode) as well. I don't think the image quality or detail went down from the images I got from it.
It wont affect image quality but file size is 1/2 the FX mode can output. My take on this is you get a narrower angle of view in DX mode. If you print, size of print will be affected.
Personally I think the 18-140 might be a better option (the Z version that is). Not that the 18-200 is bad necessarily but the 18-140 Z employs some of the latest lens technology and optics (and is an improvement over even the F-mount version). But if you want something cheap, this would work. Another option is to get the Z 24-200 FF lens and use it on a DX camera (which gives you 36-300mm equivalent angle of view, although it does have a variable aperture too). The 24-120 f/4 Z lens also works great but is a bit more expensive than the others, and may make a Z50/Zfc/Z30 a bit heavy (especially front heavy) but you would have very good optics and would give a usable range of 36-180mm equivalent. The only downside to the 24-120 is it's not stabilized (doesn't have VR) so it may be harder to shoot in low-light with the APSC cameras. This is where the 24-200 on the Z50 may be better as it does have VR.
Hands down, this was the most disappointing Nikon lens I ever owned. I purchased it new from B&H Photo in 2006. It saw life on my old Nikon DX DSLR D80, D300, and D7100 bodies. My main gripes with it were: - AF was slow - It had lots of pretty complex distortion - Pronounced vignetting, especially at 18mm f/3.5 - It was not sharp, but least soft at 35mm f/8 - Very prone to zoom creep, with no lock But boy was it a "convenient" general purpose walk around lens... riddled with compromises galore. What really ticked me off about it: One day in 2013 I removed this lens from my camera bag, already mounted on my then brand new D7100, and it's AF-S motor was dead as a door nail. The lens was always very well cared for, never banged or dropped, never got wet, etc. In point of fact, it was so clean it looked virtually brand new. Off to Nikon USA in California it went for repair. As it was about 7 years old by this point it was no longer covered under its Nikon USA 5-year warranty - I almost forgot that Nikon USA used to warranty their new lenses for up to 5 years. Oh well. Anyway, Nikon customer service being what it wasn't, and still isn't, told me it would cost $200 for a basic servicing repair (with a mere 90-day warranty), and undisclosed more for any as yet undefined significant repair, plus $14 for return S&H. Otherwise, they would simply ship it back to me "as is" for $14. There was never any explanation as to what was wrong with my lens, or specifically what was actually repaired. I got my repaired lens back in about two weeks. I thoroughly tested it out upon its return to me (a few hundred photos). It seemingly worked as good as new. About four months (120 days) later, the AF-S motor died, again. WtF!?! Nikon USA said to send it back in, and for a minimum of $200, plus $14 S&H, they'd be happy to repair it again. Like I said, Nikon's customer service isn't. I ended up donating this unreliable PoS zoom lens to my local Goodwill, with the disclosure that its AF-S motor was non-functional. Quite simply the worst Nikon lens I've ever owned. I've never again purchased another so-called super-zoom lens. I don't think I ever will, at least not a Nikon.
Damn! That sucks. Yeah, I heard Nikon customer service just treats non-NPS like nothing. It's truly unfortunate. And yeah, the quality of this lens is definitely not the highest. The lens is already hanging. Mine isn't sharp past the 100mm focal length. The only reason I got mine was because I got it for such a good deal and eventually, I'll hand down to someone since it's still functioning. Thanks for sharing, seriously appreciate you sharing your experiences with one of Nikon's lowest quality lenses.
I’m using this lense on the D800… I’m confused because it’s giving my photos a fish-eye effect ? I’m a beginner and am very confused as to is this is an operator error or if this is how the photos are supposed to look with this lens?? PLEASE HELP!
Hey man, just wondering if the lens works with filming. I own a Nikon D300 and the 18-200 vr, but the problem is that I can't film with the Nikon D300. I'd like to buy a camera capable of filming but it would be awesome if this lens works and I can just sell my D300 and buy a new body.
I've used this lens on my Z50 and the video from it is fine. Not sure what you're filming but it's good for filming. Just be aware that if you're filming past 85mm (or longer), and you're holding the camera, you footage will be shaking.
