It is possible I will find myself able to upgrade my camera soon. I am currently using a Canon Powershot S5IS and will likely choose to upgrade to the Nikon D300. (Although I have also considered the Canon 40D).

But I am really at a loss as to what lens or lenses to choose. I will probably not be able to spend more than $2500 (maybe less) on the body + lenses. The lens choice I make at this point is rather important, as it will likely be some time before I could afford to purchase additional equipment.

There is a Nikon D300 kit option with the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AFS DX VR Zoom. This seems it might be a good option, however I've read both high praise and negative comments regarding this lens. One review quoted barrel and pincushion distortion throughout and did not recommend it for wildlife and/or architecture photography while another reviewer stated that since acquiring this lens he rarely has need for anything else. Does anyone have any experience with this lens?

I shoot primarily wildlife/nature/landcape, but dabble in architectural images as well.

I am wondering if I would be better off to purchase two separate lenses instead of the one "do it all" 18-200. (If I could accomplish that given my budget)

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Hi Rebecca,

I recently upgraded from a Canon Powershot S3IS to the Nikon D300. I also considered the Canon 40D. They are both very good DSLR's.

I purchased my D300 as a kit /w the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AFS DX VR Zoom ... only because it was my top choice for a good all-around-lens. I have used it mostly on landscape, nature, flowers, & some wildlife. I used this lens on some of my recent duck/geese images. As far as barrel or pincushion distortion goes, I haven't had a problem with that yet or it just wasn't that noticible to the eye.

I also have the Nikkor 70-300mm 4.6-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR Zoom which I use mostly for wildlife / birds. I find as far as quality goes both lens are equal.

EJ 100k_xle uses the Nikon D300 for all his wildlife captures & he can be of some assistance also.

All in all, I believe the 18-200mm to be a very good lens, but not a high end lens. It all depends on what you will be shooting. The VR (Vibration Reduction) works wonderfully.

D300 / lens? I love that camera plus I'm very pleased with the lenses thus far, though it takes awhile to get accustomed to ... common with any upgrade in camera. I will mention the D300 also comes with its own editing software ... Capture NX ... nice if you plan on shooting RAW.

If given the chance I would recommend to stop in at a camera / photography store ... take a look at the camera & lens & get a feel for how the camera handles. I have small hands & given the size / weight of the camera / lens, I have had no problem.

If you decide to purchase camera & lens separately, you may want to check out Sigma. They have come out with quite of few new Nikon compatible lenses, though they may not all work with the D300. I just special ordered the Sigma 150mm Macro lens ... 4 - 6 weeks I was told, but will probably be more like 6 - 8 weeks. I was told Sigma can be very slow getting their orders out. I can't give any input on their lenses as I'm not that familiar with them, but I'm anxious to try out the macro.

Then as you mentioned, how much one is willing to spend factors into the decision also. One of the reasons I went with the camera / lens kit. I made my purchase through Ritz Camera online ... only because I've been a customer of theirs for many years. My philosophy ... why change when I'm satisfied with the service.

Hope this helps & if you have any questions I will be glad to try to answer them.

Sherree :-)

PS ... I will be shooting some architecture in the next few days, so I'll upload some images ... soon.

Thanks for your thoughtful info, Sherree! I'm glad to know you are pleased with your 18-200 and I definitely want to get into a camera shop to get a bit "hands on" with the equipment.

Because I am really not well versed with tech aspects, I'm finding it harder to decipher a lot of the reviews on lenses :) Definitely a learning curve.

The main thing I don't want to do is spend $700+ on a "do it all" lens that turns out to be sub-standard. If I can get far better image quality with a standard zoom and then perhaps get a second lens like a wide or telephoto and still stay within my price range I think I would prefer that, but I'm not sure that's realistic $$-wise.

A friend of mine has the 18-200 and doesn't like it very much. He doesn't like the look of the bokeh (out of focus areas) as much as some of his other lenses (ie 50mm 1.8, and 24-70 2.8). He also isn't always happy with the sharpness and some of the other things you mentioned. However he is comparing it to gear that is in a different price range.

The first lens that comes to my mind for you would be the 24-70 2.8, but i don't think that would fit into your quoted price. It also doesn't give you nearly the same range, or the VR. I would probably take the 2.8 glass over the VR however.

On a whole (price and range in mind) the 18-200 might be your best bet. I would imagine coupled with the d300 your going to be getting better results than you are getting now. There just is the possibility of getting better results if you are willing to spend a chunck more cash, and carry around some heavier gear.

I believe I am suffering from lens lust :) If I had the funds, I would haul around heavy gear with the greatest of pleasure! So I think I will have to content myself with what my budget can afford at this time and use the 18-200 as a learning tool and stepping stone. Now, if you will all just cross your fingers for me that these dollars come through! :)

I have a D200 and I *hate* the 18-200mm VR ... though, I'll admit, I took 100-150 shots with it today (happy snaps).

On the D300, it's like shooting through a piece of saran wrap (not quite, but you get the idea) ... waste of the camera's potential.

Since your set up is like $2,249 (USD), you could instead ...

Get like a D40 and a cheap 18-55mm ($480) and buy a 70-200mm VR seperately ($1625). ($2105 total). Then you'll really be cookin'. Or if you dont like the long end, there is a 17-55mm which is excellent (and I have never used). Or a wider angle lens ... or a macro ... or whatever.

I think it's kind of a waste to buy a expensive body, cheap glass now; when it should be expensive (long(er) lasting) glass now, expensive body later? Of course, that's just my opinion.

PS: Dont forget about, other than increased speed, you get better image quality, bokeh, shallower DOF, a more professional looking camera, etc...

I'm 6 months into it with a D300 and am doing well with the 18-200 for general photography. No regrets. :^D

I felt the same with with mine for the first six months. =P

Then I realized ...

Of course it depends on personal preference. Some people love the 18-200.

While i think Noah may be a bit extreme on the 18-200, i think i agree with what he says about spending the cash on good glass and going with a cheaper body. If you buy good glass you wont ever really need to replace it. A body on the other hand you might be more likely to want to replace.

That said, i don't really want to try and talk you out of a d300. It seems to be a truly great camera. Im considering replacing my d70 with one right now. It might be something to think about though. Perhaps go with a bit of a cheaper body, like the d60 or d80, and spend the money saved on better glass.

Maybe I'm just jealous that you're getting a D300? :)

Ken Rockwell speaks on the ... Nikon 300mm f/4 ... and on the Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6G.

More on lenses at dpreview.com ... Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum.

And finally ... Ken Rockwell on the Nikon D300 itself.

believe it or not, my first inclination was to get the D40. I have heard so many great things about it and the price is excellent. However...the resolution became a big factor. I'm looking to be able to make large prints, and I am afraid that the D40 doesn't have the resolution for that.

I've got a lot of thinking to do :) I can see the logic behind going for better glass before a better body. Whatever I choose at this step will need to last me several years as it is highly unlikely I will be able to upgrade for quite a long time.

the 6 megapixels in the d40 might not be as limiting as you might think. I have printed a 16x20 that i took with my d70. It looks great. I don't see myself printing anything bigger than that. However i don't think id want to do much cropping before printing a print that large. To me that is when the higher resolution is helpful.

I have it!! A lovely Nikon D300 with the 18-200 in my hot little hands. My hot, trembling with fear lest I drop it in the first 48 hours hands :D Now, just give me about three months to figure out what all the little buttons and bleeps and doohickies are for...ha!
All I can say is that I am VERY glad I owned the PowerShot before I bought the D300. Otherwise I may have been so intimidated by this camera. I'm still a little intimidated as it is :D
Thanks to you all so much for your input and advice on lens choice, it really helped me sort things in my head. I think what clinched it was when I read Your Camera Doesn't Matter". That article plus the advice from you all helped put my lens choice in perspective.

Thanks guys!

Congrats Rebecca. I'm working with a D80 and the Nikon 18-200 VR. Wonderful package!

Thanks, Pierre! I'm really excited over here :))

Ok, let's see here ... tallying up your consultation bill ... one moment please ... *sounds of an adding machine are heard in the background* ... yep, there it is in black and white. Although the range of tonalities are not perfect.

You owe 'us' 157 images at 1600 X 1200 resolution.

Pay up.


:oP

have fun with ur camera!

...just dont do what i did: "yipee! yipee!" *smacks the camera against the wall*

-.-

*sets up a stakeout on Rebecca's galleries ... waits patiently ...*

Rebecca .... congrat's on the new D300 & lens. You will love it! What I found best was to take it slow with all the different settings ... then experiment. I'm still doing alot of experimenting myself. Reading through the user's manual several times helps too. Enjoy! Will be looking forward to your images.

Hmm..157 images I owe? I've already taken 300+! :D I'm visiting family and itching to get back home so I can see what they look like on the comp :)

Thanks everyone!

Well...I'm really thrilled with the clarity of the images, however from my first shooting session I am finding the images are really lacking in contrast and seem to have a "grayish film" over them...I'm having to do far more post-processing. This may be simply user error..goodness knows I haven't figured out all this camera has to offer yet.

There are options to change the contrast and saturation among other things that you might want to take a look at. If my memory is correct nikon calls it optimize image or something. Take a look in your manual for it.

It's like 95% a you-own-a-DSLR-now type of thing. DSLRs dont do the same amount in-camera post processing stuff like the little things. It's normal. Of course you could use the optimize image menu, but if u shoot jpg, u get the best overall detail in the end if u leave everything as 'low' or 'off' and do all/most of the post stuff on the computer. A dslr just offers u more control over your end product (and other things). I think of it as a, you pay more for less... :-/

(not my real opinion).

I like ur latest photo btw.

Here ya go, Kenny comes to the rescue and saves the day:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d300/picture-control.htm


Kenny is Noah's hero. He has a poster of him on his ceiling. :oD

No comment.

Hey, great link Les! Thanks :)) I think I'll stay out of the kenny/noah love fest :)