Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED Vibration Reduction Zoom Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras

I own a variety of amateur glass for my Nikons. Bodys; I use a D5100 and D5500. This is by far my most commonly used lense. During family outings, parks, zoo days, this is my go to lense. It allows me to capture near and far without carrying two cameras or swapping lenses. However, compared to my 18-55 and 55-300, the pic quality does suffer ever so slightly at different ranges. When out at 300, this lense falls about 10% short of where the 55-300 can reach. and the pic quality at that range is arguably better on the 55-300. I say arguably because ive never went 1:1 on these shots to compare. The real 1:1 testing I have done has been in shorter range, and while the zoom reach is definitely shorter, the quality is so similar at close range its hard to decipher.. Ive taken shots at the local zoo with both and taken very similar shots on different days, and i do prefer the 55-300 for quality, but still use the 18-300 for its versatility. What this has allowed, which is awesome.. is for me to carry my second camera with a prime lense instead of having the 18-55 on it. Now i carry either a 35 or 50 on the d5100 to grab great portraits. Sometimes i like to pull in really far, and get a close up of an animal, then come back out and grab a pic of the boy with the animal in frame in the background. Having this 18-300 allows all of that in one package. I attached some pics i caught with this lense. Pros *) 18-300 in one lense, that in it self is a HUGE pro **) Extremely small and light weight. Its lighter and smaller than the 55-300. Is that a pro however? ive read and found personally, when a lense with similar or more attributes is smaller than a comparable model with less.. The image quality is usually what pays the price. Cons *) 18-200 moves very freely, and nice. 200-300 meets some opposition and stiffness. **) 300 on this lense and 300 on my 55-300 are not the same 300. Sadly i noticed this with my tamron 16-300 as well, i had hoped the nikon wouldnt do that to me; but it has. Would i recommend this to others, absolutely. Would i recommend it over the 55-300; that depends on situation. I personally feel I will have a use for both. I just need to figure out how thats going to work for me. All of this is on DX bodies only, as this is a DX lense I feel its fair to only bring those up. On an FX body you need to enable a DX crop mode and loose a chunk of the resolution only using the center of the image sensor. No point in doing that :P I personally dont own an FX body yet, but the plans are there to add one to the mix sooner than later :) Pics and what lense was used - 55-300 jaguar snow leopard red panda boy in green shirt 18-300 lions boy in blue

Show more

The Lens is very clear and takes excellent photos but at 18MM i get vignetting which is a little frustrating. I really do like the zoom to 300 mm. ( I also have a 18-270 Tamron which I like as well, but get a similar effect of vignetting). I like that the Nikkor lens stays where I set the zoom as opposed to the Tamron which tends to slide in and out without my assistance). I do recommend either of the lenses if you keep in mind the Tamron is about 60% of the cost of the Nikkor. The Nikkor does seem to be a little clearer. So it is a trade off. What I like about either of these is the fact I do not have to change lenses and open my cameras to the environment as often. July 10th Update to the above. I have now used the lens to take over 3,000 photos and can say that my statements above stand as written. I do believe that the Nikkor Lens is a bit sharper than the Tamron, and the vignetting is very real when using the wide angle. I just finished a trip to Alaska and got really good shots of whale spouts, tails and many Eagles. I am very happy with the results and do recommend the Lens. Just remember you will need to edit the Wide Angle shots.

Show more

I have had a Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX lens for a few years. Despite the amazing focal range it has, when I saw that Nikon had come out with a similar lens that goes to 300mm I had to try it. Summing up my experiences with this new lens, its a big thumbs up. The extra focal range was much appreciated to make a shot of a far-away subject that I would have passed up with the 18-200mm lens. The 18-300mm lens also seems to have a touch more color and wide-open sharpness compared to the 18-200mm lens. Of lens creep, the 18-200mm lens would extend all the way out if I left it pointed downwards. The 18-300mm lens is more reluctant to extend - it may extend a little if pointed straight down. On the minus side the 18-300mm lens has the same distortion effect when used wide open as the 18-200mm lens on objects such as buildings when taken fairly closely. If you are trying to decide between the Nikon 18-200mm lens vs. the 18-300mm lens and have the extra bucks, buy the 18-300mm lens. I will be selling my 18-200mm lens. I would rate the 18-300mm lens 4.5 stars if I could.

Show more

The has become my primary lens for traveling. The versatility is outstanding especially for the price. I am using on my Nikon D7200 and have excellent results. It adds some weight and when at 300mm it seems to me very long (length). Certainly I wish it were a little faster, but then that would cost much more. If youre looking for a decent all around lens at a decent price, you cant go wrong with this one. I also considered the other Nikon 18-300 but it is $300 more and I did not think the extra value was there.

Show more