Yup the Nikkor is f5.6 at tele end.

Anyway what I was saying is Nikkor edged every 3rd party lenses is true n u can see many reviews. I forgot which link.

Yes u r right that 18-200 Nikkor got distortion,vignetting, CA and etc. But the distortion if compared to Sigma n Tamron, they are still way ahead.

Bout the lens creep, it's true also. But i handheld all the time. So i dun have that problem. Ppl like to exaggerate the lens creep issue. Why dun we look at the positive side where Kenrockwell drops the lens n the glass dun break???

And the VR is superb. Cheers

This post has been edited by jeffbong: May 22 2007, 02:32 AM

^forget the link...

The ultra wide nikon vs 3rd party tests have varying results with no clear winner...

The 18-200 nikon vs 3rd party is such a whitewash that reviewers don't even bother comparing...

IMHO the VR2 is what makes the lens worth 1k more and rounds it off as the current favourite travel lens...

Cameralabs

Quote from Cameralabs:
(The big question then is whether Nikon's 18-200mm is worth twice the price of its rivals from Sigma and Tamron. In terms of optical quality, the Nikkor certainly edged ahead of its competition, particularly in our outdoor real-life and corner sharpness tests. The build quality is also of a much higher standard and the focusing quicker and noticeably quieter. The focal ratio at the telephoto end is also slightly faster.

These are all worthy differences, but not enough to justify the higher price alone. Crucially though the Nikkor lens additionally sports the ability to counteract camera-shake. Its VR II technology proved highly effective in our tests and is equally useful for stabilising the longest focal lengths as it is for shooting under failing light without having to resort to higher sensitivities.

We'd say the inclusion of VR along with the other benefits makes the Nikkor worth the extra, although anyone on a tighter budget can't fail to be impressed by the sheer value of the Sigma and Tamron models. If you can afford the extra though, go for the Nikkor - it delivers great quality and features, and therefore comes Highly Recommended to any Nikon D-SLR owner who only wants to carry a single lens for all occasions. )

I guess the price is the absolute thing. Other than that, I believe cameralabs agreed that the Nikkor performs better. It doesn't really justify the 1k extra like what Gadget Freak say. How nice if Msia Ringgit is same with USD. Easier to choose. Hahahah

This post has been edited by jeffbong: May 22 2007, 02:22 AM

^if msia RM same with USD then this lens will be sold out lorrr.. in america people opening up threads everyday to search for the lens whilst over here shops have like unlimited supply LOL!

A friend of mine laughed at me when i told him i spent 2.5k on a 18-200vr lens. He LCLY said the 200 will be useless. Then he take and try out for 10 minutes..... his reply "eh quite useful leh, can borrow me?"

BUt its all up to budget i guess, 1k can get a nice one week trip in redang or someplace like that.

Once question though, if buy third party lens, what is the service like when rosak? Am interested in sigma 30mm or 10-20mm