Nikon 18-200 VR too good for D40?

[undetthumb]

Hi all,

After you lot convinced me to move into the world of DSLR's I bought a D40 about this time last year. As predicted, I am now ready to spend more money on camera equipment and I am considering the 18-200 VR lens to replace (and expand on) my 18-55 kit lens.
My only worry is that it will out perform the camera. What do you think?

[andynoquantum]

It still relies on the person pressing the buttons

I've got the D40 and D80, kit 18-55, 50-200, 70-300 and a straight 50mm. I upgraded my D40 to a D80 to try for higher quality and to be able to change lenses, ironically my best learning curve so far has been to dig the D40 back out again with the 50mm prime

[flat-planedCrank]

undetthumb said:

Hi all,

After you lot convinced me to move into the world of DSLR's I bought a D40 about this time last year. As predicted, I am now ready to spend more money on camera equipment and I am considering the 18-200 VR lens to replace (and expand on) my 18-55 kit lens.
My only worry is that it will out perform the camera. What do you think?

I don't have direct experience of the kit your talking about, but i'd not worry about the lens outperforming the camera too much. I have seen some crazy priced lenses on supposedly 'consumer level' cameras

(Either way the lens will work on the new camera body you'll want to buy in another 12 months )


Some 18-200 VR reviews : fredmiranda.com and photozone.de


Cheers.

[Simpo Two]

There will always be a weak link in any system. The hard part is making sure it isn't you. The rest can be solved by money

[dumbfunk]

I think it's like hi-fi and car tuning - you get best results from balancing your budget towards the areas where you get the most benefits. If you have the cash burning a hole in your pocket then go for the 18-200 - I have it and it's a wonderful lens.

But if you have £450 odd to upgrade your gear then I would have to wonder whether that wouldn't be better spent on say, a D80 and a couple of nice prime lenses, especially if buying used? For example I just changed from a D80 to a D300 and can't believe how much better the results are. Yeah, it's still me pressing the buttons but the ratio of keepers to shots taken has increased two fold. I'd expect the same experience going from D40 to D80 too.


dumbfunk

[DanH]

undetthumb said:

Hi all,

After you lot convinced me to move into the world of DSLR's I bought a D40 about this time last year. As predicted, I am now ready to spend more money on camera equipment and I am considering the 18-200 VR lens to replace (and expand on) my 18-55 kit lens.
My only worry is that it will out perform the camera. What do you think?

Nah it will be fine. What you'll realise though is that its a bit of a compromise lens. I have one with my D300 and worry its not good enough Great for travelling etc though.

[Simpo Two]

dumbfunk said:

For example I just changed from a D80 to a D300 and can't believe how much better the results are. Yeah, it's still me pressing the buttons but the ratio of keepers to shots taken has increased two fold.

Interesting. What exactly do you find is the difference?

My 'keep' ratio with a D200 at the last wedding was 91%.

[dumbfunk]

Essentially the shot are technically better - When I use autofocus it seems much more accurate and with the larger viewfinder I make less errors when focussing manually. Similarly the matrix exposure meter is more accurate and doesn't require the -0.7 adjustment that the D80 always seemed to benefit from. The quality of the finished image in terms of colour and sharpness is a noticable step up and perhaps the largest difference is the low light performance. It's no exaggeration to say that ISO1600 on the D300 looks like ISO400 on the D80.

I changed mainly for the low light improvement but have been amazed at the above and in the improved handling of the thing. It just feels like a huge step up.


df

[Elderly]

It won't 'outperform' the camera but you may not like the balance of this quite large
lens on what is quite a small body.

[stuthemong]

Simpo Two said:

Interesting. What exactly do you find is the difference?

My 'keep' ratio with a D200 at the last wedding was 91%.

That is a VERY VERY high keep rate. When I have worked with pros before, with static 3 flash systems all prior setup and tripods, they get a 33% keep rate as they fire off three shots, all perfectly exposed, then choose the best of the three.

You must have a lot of subjects who dont shut their eyes/pull a gurn, like 50% of people in normal populace!!!

To the OP

The 18-200 VR is a great lens, only crit is it is slightly slow, but you can't have everything. Buy it. It will transform the d40 from a stock

[dumbfunk]

I was going to say that - 91%?!
Did any of the people at the wedding have eyelids?


df

[undetthumb]

Thanks all. I'll stick to the original plan and buy one!
Cheers.

[Simpo Two]

dumbfunk said:

I changed mainly for the low light improvement

I'd like that too, but with fast lenses I can get by with the D200 which is good up to IS0800, so I can't quite justify £1,000 for a one stop advantage!

stuthemong said:

That is a VERY VERY high keep rate. When I have worked with pros before, with static 3 flash systems all prior setup and tripods, they get a 33% keep rate as they fire off three shots, all perfectly exposed, then choose the best of the three.

Well it's reportage, not studio work, so if it's acceptably sharp, acceptably exposed and the expressions are acceptable, then it goes to the client. Duds would be where the focus is noticeably out, or the flash doesn't fire, or when there are only 2-3 people in shot and one is blinking or has a particularly unflattering expression. The secret card is RAW, which allows me to retrieve almost all shots from a technical POV.

In your case above, all three would pass my criteria, because I'm not offering a single print for £x, but images on disc. I charge by time, not prints, whilst most 'social' photographers seem to cut their studio rate very low to attract business, then keep the original files and make most of their profit on prints. Starting from zero less than three years ago, I needed to do something different, and frankly, making prints, or getting them made, is a PITA I'd rather do without. I save aggro, client gets more images

[RobDickinson]

To the OP. I'd hapily use as high a level of glass as I could on any camera.

It may be that the lens will be beyond the camera sensors ability to resolve detail but from what I can tell the 18-200vr isnt that hot a lens (compared to others) especialy 135mm and over. I wouldnt worry about overlensing the camera at all.

[Russell B]

undetthumb said:

Thanks all. I'll stick to the original plan and buy one!
Cheers.

Have you told Dawn how much it is