New Nikkor 18-135 Lens

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ockham's Razor, Nov 4, 2006.

  1. anyone have any experience with this lens and any thoughts on using it
    as a Kit lens on a D-80.

    TIA

    --
    There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.
     
    Ockham's Razor, Nov 4, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Guest

    "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > anyone have any experience with this lens and any thoughts on using
    > it
    > as a Kit lens on a D-80.



    I don't think anyone has a full review of the lense online yet.

    I played with it briefly in the store though with some sample shots
    and compared it to the 18-70. I think they're close for sharpness.
    It's sharp enough to use wide open, but it's obviously better stopped
    down. And perhaps more CA in the 18-135. I also liked the contrast a
    bit better in the 18-70.

    It also lacks a true AF-S Silent Wave Motor (no full-time manual
    override) but it's still fairly quick to focus. It has the advantage
    of a longer zoom range to effectively cover the angle of view for a
    28-200 on a full frame camera, which would appeal to users who don't
    want to swap lenses very much.

    I recently bought the Nikon D80 and opted for an 18-70 instead of the
    18-135 mostly due to cost - I got a mint condition 18-70 used for $100
    from a friend and couldn't turn it down. I also prefer the AF-S motor
    in the 18-70, but if you're not concerned with that, then the 18-135
    is probably a decent choice. A better lense is always nicer, but for
    the price I don't think you would be disappointed.
     
    Bill, Nov 4, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bill wrote:
    >
    > I don't think anyone has a full review of the lense online yet.



    It's *lens*, Bill, and in spite of arcane usage, it's a bit odd for you
    to persist in this. Your old Teach was wrong.

    --
    john mcwilliams

    We used to be troubled by multiple personalities, but we're O.K. now....
     
    John McWilliams, Nov 4, 2006
    #3
  4. In article <>,
    "Bill" <> wrote:

    > "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > anyone have any experience with this lens and any thoughts on using
    > > it
    > > as a Kit lens on a D-80.

    >
    >
    > I don't think anyone has a full review of the lense online yet.


    Thats what I have found, thus my original question.

    Now let me ask another question, obviously I and others are in the
    18-200 quandry. A good review, but some other disquieting info from
    users. My SIL is returning his 18-200 because of a lot of vertical VR
    problem resulting in blurred pictures.

    The question, with a 10 MP camera that produces pictures that can be
    cropped and still get large prints, is there an advantage of 200 over
    135? I can get the 200 effect with the 135.

    --
    There are two ways to spell Ockham/Occam. Britannica prefers the former.
     
    Ockham's Razor, Nov 5, 2006
    #4
  5. Ockham's Razor

    Pete D Guest

    "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Bill wrote:
    >>
    >> I don't think anyone has a full review of the lense online yet.

    >
    >
    > It's *lens*, Bill, and in spite of arcane usage, it's a bit odd for you to
    > persist in this. Your old Teach was wrong.
    >
    > --
    > john mcwilliams
    >
    > We used to be troubled by multiple personalities, but we're O.K. now....


    John, you should probably capitalise your name otherwise some could possibly
    think you are an ignorant anal idiot.

    HTH
     
    Pete D, Nov 5, 2006
    #5
  6. Ockham's Razor

    Bill Guest

    "Ockham's Razor" <> wrote in message news:Mencken

    >> > anyone have any experience with this lens and any thoughts on
    >> > using
    >> > it as a Kit lens on a D-80.

    >
    > Now let me ask another question, obviously I and others are in the
    > 18-200 quandry. A good review, but some other disquieting info from
    > users. My SIL is returning his 18-200 because of a lot of vertical
    > VR
    > problem resulting in blurred pictures.


    I've only noticed a few complaints online, but I haven't been
    following the 18-200 VR lately. A friend has one and likes it, and has
    yet to mention any similar issue. I'll ask him to put it through some
    portrait shots and see if it wavers.

    If it does have an issue, I wonder if it's the same problem Canon had
    with their 70-300 IS model that didn't work well in portrait
    orientation. If so, perhaps it was limited to early models since my
    friends lense was bought rather recently. Or maybe just a batch of
    lemons.

    > The question, with a 10 MP camera that produces pictures that can be
    > cropped and still get large prints, is there an advantage of 200
    > over
    > 135? I can get the 200 effect with the 135.


    Yes and no. Obviously the angle of view is similar to 200mm on a
    cropped camera at 135mm, but it doesn't offer the same reach as a
    200mm. Personally, I would much rather have the image I want at full
    size over a forced crop because I don't have the lense I need to do
    the job.

    Bigger and more important questions are, do you want/need VR?
    Do you want/need autofocus with full-time manual override?
    Are you planing on buying more lenses or just want one super zoom?
     
    Bill, Nov 5, 2006
    #6
  7. Pete D wrote:
    > "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Bill wrote:
    >>> I don't think anyone has a full review of the lense online yet.

    >>
    >> It's *lens*, Bill, and in spite of arcane usage, it's a bit odd for you to
    >> persist in this. Your old Teach was wrong.
    >>
    >> --
    >> john mcwilliams
    >>
    >> We used to be troubled by multiple personalities, but we're O.K. now....

    >
    > John, you should probably capitalise your name otherwise some could possibly
    > think you are an ignorant anal idiot.


    Actually, whether I do so, or not, some will....

    It's a rough way I classify responses, so I know how serious I was when
    I wrote it. I reserve "lsmft" to kooks, spam, x-posts and pests.
    Properly capped when it's a reply to something on topic and that I care
    about at least somewhat.

    But, bless you for the kind observation....

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Nov 5, 2006
    #7
  8. Ockham's Razor

    Neil H. Guest

    "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Pete D wrote:
    > > "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> Bill wrote:
    > >>> I don't think anyone has a full review of the lense online yet.
    > >>
    > >> It's *lens*, Bill, and in spite of arcane usage, it's a bit odd for you

    to
    > >> persist in this. Your old Teach was wrong.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> john mcwilliams
    > >>
    > >> We used to be troubled by multiple personalities, but we're O.K.

    now....
    > >
    > > John, you should probably capitalise your name otherwise some could

    possibly
    > > think you are an ignorant anal idiot.

    >
    > Actually, whether I do so, or not, some will....
    >
    > It's a rough way I classify responses, so I know how serious I was when
    > I wrote it. I reserve "lsmft" to kooks, spam, x-posts and pests.
    > Properly capped when it's a reply to something on topic and that I care
    > about at least somewhat.
    >
    > But, bless you for the kind observation....


    <guffaw!>

    And touché.

    Neil
     
    Neil H., Nov 6, 2006
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. niicko
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,136
    niicko
    Sep 11, 2003
  2. Digital Puer

    Canon 28-135 vs. 28-200 lens

    Digital Puer, Oct 14, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    5,544
    Tim McTeague
    Oct 15, 2003
  3. Jack

    Canon 28-135 IS USM lens on 10D front end loose?

    Jack, Jan 15, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    3,436
    LouTheArtist
    Mar 6, 2011
  4. GTABuySell
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    8,288
    GTABuySell
    Jun 7, 2004
  5. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jun 17, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    995
Loading...

Share This Page