Looking to Buy Nikkor Standard Zoom

So with the upgrade to the D300s and 300 f/4 I've sold off my D60 with it's kit lenses. I'd love to purchase the new 18-200mm VR II lens from Nikon but it's too expensive at this point in time. If anyone is willing to part with a new/used 18-105mm VR (first choice) or 18-55mm VR please contact me as I need something for regular shooting and closeup shots. Also, if anyone has suggestions of a different route I should take, please feel free to chime in. Thanks in advance.

- Luke

I would skip the lenses you are talking about and get a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. It's sharp, it's fast, and it's a much better lens than the cheap ones you are talking about. Big mistake to spend big money on a camera and then go cheap on lenses. That's exactly backwards. I only use Nikon's very best lenses on my D300. The Tamron is at least a pro class lens. You will like the f2.8. The lens is a favorite of beginning wedding photographers.


Kent in SD

Luke, The 18-200mm VR by Nikon is definitely worth the money if you are limited on lenses. It is very versatile and yes it doesn't have the most superb optics but you will get a big bang for the buck. When thinking of buying a lens you need to really have in mind what it's purpose is and longevity. Camera bodies will come and go but at least so far with the Nikon line their lenses will fit the new bodies where as other brands will sometimes not. Spend the money on the versatile lens and save for the specific lenses. I like staying with Nikon as it does marry very well with in it's family.

Luke, I agree with both Kent and Ron. I have the 18-200 Nikkor VR (1st version, not the VRII). If you expose correctly and do not intend to make poster-size prints and use a monopod or tripod when you can--though I've found the VR to be really good--it will serve you well until you know which pro-type lens(es) you really want. Its minimum focussing distance is a very nice 19 inches (normal-sized flowers, butterflies, frogs, dragonflies, tadpoles, et al.). This lens is probably a real bargain now that the VRII version is out.

It all depends on how you're going to use the glass Luke. We've got a large array of the pro lenses and use them frequently. But in circumstances that don't allow carry of a lot of weight, frequent lens changes, or puttering around with camera gear rather than taking photos instantly, we're greatly dependent on the DX series of glass for our D2X's and D300's. For landscape work and other very deliberate shooting and making very large prints, the pro glass is great. But for "walk around" photography and quick responses to circumstances, it's hard to beat the DX glass and VR.

About 95% of what I shoot and 75% of what my wife shoots fits that description. We use the pro glass in the studio, on location shoots and on landscape shoots, but it stays in the bag for aerials, industrial shooting, events, hiking, or bad weather. Our picks of that particular litter are the 18-200mm (either version), the 24-120mmVR, and the Sigma 10-20.

I was recently on a high dollar, high tension industrial shoot with three of the four days in rain. You just didn't want to be changing lenses while trying to keep the rest of the camera gear dry, much less the front of the lens. The 18-200 was a superstar.

And BTW- Some of the earliest individual lenses in both the 18-200 and 24-120 had sharpness problems, requiring return trips to Nikon for repair. I'm not aware of any in recent years that suffered from the same problems. We've got four of each, and they are all surprisingly sharp. The VR on the II version of the 18-200 is startlingly fast to engage and effective, making it my top pick in my whole camera bag for challenging aerial shoots. And it works so well for any shooting without tripods that I often "forget" my tripod. In combination with the high ISO performance of the D300, you can get startlingly good low light, hand held photos. Yeah, the tripod will help, but it's not "mandatory" for all uses.

I just tried twice to post a photo here, but no dice.

Thanks for all of the advice. I think I should have been more descriptive in my needs. I use the the wide angle for landscape shots at work - quick dirty pictures. The 55-200 range I use for dragonflies, frogs, birds if I can get close enough, etc. I hated changing lenses when I would be in the field or hiking so I would prefer an expansive range that allows me to go from wide to zoom. One day I will get a dedicated macro for the insect/amphibian/flower work I do and I'm also looking for something with VR... I guess this is all pointing towards the 18-200! Can anyone show me shots they have gotten with it? Thanks in advance

Here's one at the wide end of the scale I grabbed while standing in an 80 foot hoist waiting for action on an industrial shoot. Just point, frame and shoot.