Wide-tele zoom

[Don King]

Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom Lens?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I haven't used one personally, but here's my thinking:

Pros: Cheap. Uses 72mm filters which are the same size as many other Nikkors that people would like in their RED arsenal like the 17-35mm and the 85mm prime.

Cons: I don't think it's a constant-aperture lens... And there's no manual aperture ring. It's also a DX series lens, which isn't ideal as it's intended to fit the slightly smaller sensor size of current DSLR systems.

I can't comment on rotation length or throw for focus and zoom rings as I haven't used this lens. Given the lack of a manual aperture ring and that it's a DX lens, I personally wouldn't run out and buy one.

 

[albert rudnicki]

BE AWARE of the zooms that don't have constant aperture.
Also lack of manual controls can be a real hassle.
Albert
www.yayofilms.com

 

[Don King]

BE AWARE of the zooms that don't have constant aperture.

You seem to miss the point. Zooms but working as variable primes.

Also lack of manual controls can be a real hassle.

Isn't the automatic control the Birger's lens mount idea?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Don,

With a variable-aperture zoom, you're only real use will be as a variable prime. But it looks like you're aware of that.

Birger's Nikon mount should include aperture control. So that should aid in this respect. But if you're looking at picking up a lens for use with RED, you should really try to avoid lenses in the DX series (they're not sized the same as conventional 35mm SLR glass) and even with the aperture control on the upcoming Birger mount, I would still be leary of buying a lens without that aperture ring. I do own one lens without it -- the 105mm Nikon Macro. It's an awesome lens, but the lack of the manual aperture ring is a pain, even when using with a DSLR. I don't like the current approach by Nikon and Canon where most new lenses are built with a "Photography for the Masses" attitude or where they actually inhibit functionality by making them "easier" to use.

 

[donatello b]

1st thought = could work very good for day exteriors ...

2nd thought = for interiors i would need to know the smallest aperture in the 18-135mm range ( this is range i usually use for interiors) .. if i have a solid F4 that holds 18-135mm then i would need to light interiors ( or night exteriors ) to F4 ( which might not be T4 ) ... based on Reds ISO test i've seen so far that might work ( using iso 1000) and that is if i HAD to use that lens ..

given a choice i would - consider it for day exteriors ... find another lens for interior & night use ...

 

[Evin Grant]

you should really try to avoid lenses in the DX series (they're not sized the same as conventional 35mm SLR glass)

They will however cover the Red mysterium sensor just fine.

and even with the aperture control on the upcoming Birger mount, I would still be leary of buying a lens without that aperture ring. I do own one lens without it -- the 105mm Nikon Macro. It's an awesome lens, but the lack of the manual aperture ring is a pain, even when using with a DSLR. I don't like the current approach by Nikon and Canon where most new lenses are built with a "Photography for the Masses" attitude or where they actually inhibit functionality by making them "easier" to use.

I do agree with you here though.

I own the 18-200 VR and even though the build quality is a little cheap I am always amazed at how good the photos from it look, even at 12MP on my D2x.
It's my standard walk around travel lens, I often only take this a 12-24 f4 DX and a 28mm f1.4 for available light work. It really is a feat in optical engineering.