Nikon D300 ED lens withVR
 

with 18-200 kit lens...anyone know anything about them...I imagine it has to be better than my entry level Olympus E520 with 14-42mm & 40-150mm kit lens ...I have been offered it to buy at a good price, I know it is heavier than mine but if it is a good camera I could get used to that....what are your thoughts, the guy who bought it did so on a whim...he doesn't even use it,so it is near new condition....I am guessing the good thing about it is you wouldn't have to change over the lens...I would be interested in your thoughts.... thank you

Nikon D300 ED lens
 

I'm slightly confused-are you referring to the Nikon 300mm ED lens or a Nikon D300 camera and 18-200 lens? Either way, the 300mm lens is a lovely bit of kit and you wouldn't go wrong with the D300 camera and18-200 VR lens. I keep thinking about buying this 18-200 lens to go on my D90-perhaps Santa will bring me one?
As regards weight, yes they will be heavier than the Olympus gear!

Dave

thanks Dave, yes D300 camera and18-200 VR lens...I just wrote it as he described...I have been doing some research since I wrote this, it would depend on what he says is a good price I suppose, they have newer models out now the D7000 with the same lens is at a price I imagine he would want for his camera...I will ask what he wants for it and go from there.... then I would need spare batteries & filters and what ever.....just a thought at the moment....the other thing I am thinking is get a macro lens for my Olympus...?? as I seem to do a lot of closeup work ....I imagine the Olympus isn't of the same quality as the Nikon D300 though! thanks for your opinion ...I will see what happens.

Hi Trena

Assuming I've found the same lens on photozone test/reviews I think you will find the 18-200 a backward step over your current lens setup. The only good thing that can be said about lens in the 18-200 category is they are a handy one lens travel solution. The image quality is good enough for snaps.

The edges of the frame look quite scary on the 18-200 example shot of the wire fence. Blurred and colour fringing.


http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikko...r182003556vrii

http://www.photozone.de/olympus--fou...-oly_1442_3556

http://www.photozone.de/olympus--fou...-oly_40150_456

thanks for that Rob, I just don't know anything about cameras and appreciate everyones input...doesn't sound like much of a lens from that review....I am happy enough with my camera,I still have heaps to learn on it yet....just that this offer came up & I had to ask. thanks again.

From what I have read over the years any 18-200 (or 18-270 or 300 or whatever) are a huge compromise trading convenience against image quality. If you want quality the consensus is to avoid such lenses.

Totally agree with this. In general anything with a zoom ratio of over 3x(ish) will start to suffer as it is basically impossible to optimise lens performance across such a range. So you end up with something that is good enough across the range, smaller ratios tend to mean better quality (within a similar price) and primes are even better.

I agree too. As has been mentioned earlier, they make good walk-around do-it-all lenses for travel, but image quality suffers.
I used to use a sigma 28-300 when on long walks or days out climbing in the mountains, where the benefits of not having to change lenses and carry a lot of kit were more important. (Also, I worried less about breaking it knocking it against rocks and getting it buried in snow as it was relatively cheap - the 1Ds11 body could take the rough treatment but I didnt want to smash a 70-200 f2.8!) In good light and stopped down, it did ok, but in any sort of challenging conditions you could start to see its limitations.

thank you all for your time & help...appreciate your input.