|
Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Zoom Lens with Built In Motor for Nikon Digital SLR |  | Brand: Tamron
List Price: $644.95
Buy New: $199.95
as of 7/29/2010 14:00 CDT details
You Save: $445.00 (69%)
New (6)
Rating:  12 reviews
Color: Black
Media: Electronics
Autographed: No
Memorabilia: No
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.3
Dimensions (in): 5.3 x 4.3 x 4.2
MPN: AF014NII-700
Model: AF014NII-700
UPC: 725211147312
EAN: 0725211147312
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Features:
| • | Built in motor for use on the new Nikon Cameras | | • | Includes lens hood | | • | 6 year Tamron Warranty | | • | Zoom lock, 62mm filter size |
|
| Accessories:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Lenses are designed for exclusive use on digital cameras with smaller-size imagers and inherit all of the benefits of our Di products. These lenses are not designed for conventional cameras and digital cameras with image sensors larger than 24mm x 16mm. At Tamron, our quest has always been to make the ideal zoom lens. As a result of this ongoing challenge, we have introduced the concept of our high-power zoom lens in the AF18-200mm XR Di II for exclusive use with digital SLRs. Tamron's original development of proprietary core technologies such as Aspherical element production, Multiple Cam Mechanism and Integrated Focus Cam design lend to the creation of the world's lightest, most compact 11.1X zoom lens made for digital SLR cameras. The 18-200mm (28-300 when converted to 35mm) provides the digital photographer with the versatility of a true wide to ultra tele zoom in an amazingly easy to use design. Macro Magnification Ratio 1 - 3.7 (at f=200mm MFD 0.45m) Filter Diameter - 62mm Weight 398g (14oz) Diameter x Length 2.9 x 3.3in. (73.8 x 83.7mm) Flower-shaped Lens hood
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 12
 What a buy! July 2, 2010
Samuel Tolbert
A good friend of mine has the Nikon D40 and her lens was the 18-135. Her pictures looked fantastic compared to my D80 with its standard lens. While searching for the lens she has I saw where its discontinued, then I looked up the updated version and saw the price tag around 899.00. Well I did another search for OEM lens are found this one. Thank you to all those you have written reviews you helped me make my decision on this product. I'm by no means a professional photographer I just like to take good looking pictures. This lens blew me away on the very first shot I took and I'm going to make it my primary lens from now on. The 289.00 price wasn't a bad deal either. If you're a part time photographer who just wants to take good looking pictures you can't go wrong with this lens.
 Resolving power like a Kodak instamatic May 10, 2010
Glenn Miller (Ca,USA)
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
I don't normally give bad reviews except to warn people....This lens does have great range but the poor corner to corner resolving power and low contrast make this lens a poor choice for just about every type of subject. In low light,back lit,or harsh lighting conditions like reflections off of cars,aircraft,or water etc,the lens wants to hunt for the proper focus to the point where after a full 60 secs of this lens trying to find its focus,I just switch to manual focus. The lens even stops responding altogether from time to time and the camera has to be shut off and the lens removed and then put back on to cure this. Also the lens is not sealed on,the body mount side and I have dust between elements that can not be cleaned without a complete disassemble. I can only speak of my EOS 20D but the other canon lenses I have exhibit none of these problems. I have been into photography for 40 years and I would have never considered a Tamron lens. This was my first Digital Camera and I let the Salesman sell me a Tamron POS...Dont buy this lens if you plan on doing serious Photography it never fails to disappoint.
great lens April 25, 2010
S. Lyman (ct.)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
I was sceptical at first but a few photography friends checked it out and thought it was great. I'm glad I listened to them and purchased it because I love it! Especially for the hummingbirds in my backyard and our road trip to Florida! We have gotten some beautiful pictures.
 Fair Lens, But Limited March 9, 2010
TheWaldo
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
I bought the immediate predecessor to this lens and while it is a fair lens and takes moderately decent pictures (certainly cannot compare to the quality of real Nikkor lenses) I find the specs somewhat misleading. The lens is stated to be 18-200 but when I ran actual image comparisons against a real Nikkor 200mm lens, the Tamron comes up WAY short. I would estimate that the actual image shows this lenses to be roughly 160mm or so. I use it often, only because it is so handy to have a moderate wide angel to medium telephoto in one package, and for most occasions it does a fair job. But if I had the money, it would be Nikon all the way next time.
Tamron 18-200, One of Several Very Good, All Purpose, Walkabout Lenses January 7, 2010
Tiffany Ann (Black Diamond Bay)
14 out of 17 found this review helpful
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and so, I think, is one's opinion of a camera lens. I've learned over the years that lens reviews are helpful, but they are just opinions. Yes, for sure, you generally get better optics with more expensive lenses, but it's certainly not a guarantee. And for reasons one can only wonder about, oftentimes two copies of the same lens will produce very different results. For example, my friend Sara, who is as nuts about buying (we're like compulsive buyers) and using Canon lenses as I am about buying and using Nikon ones, has a Canon EF-S 18-55 kit lens that produces images so tack sharp through its whole range that would make you cry.
And so it goes with super zooms, these wonderful lenses that go from pretty wide to very long. If you look at the reviews of any of them, some people claim horrible results, while others scratch their heads, because they're just loving them to death.
My first superzoom was a Sigma 18-200 which I got about five years ago and I was blown away with what I could do with just one lens. Plus my shots were pretty darn sharp. The lens was more expensive then, than it is now. It's still a good lens, it weighs a couple ounces less than a pound and if I only could have been satisfied, I'd have saved a bundle of money. Ah well. Anyway, I had an opportunity to try out the Tamron 18-200 as well back then, but I decided on the Sigma. It was a coin toss. At the time I thought both lenses would be good general, all purpose, walkabout lenses. They wouldn't be as sharp or fast as primes and wouldn't be as light as shorter zooms, but heck, one lens which went all the way from 18 to 200mm (okay 27 to 350mm in the real world), such a deal.
Both lenses were five star lenses as far as I was concerned, both still are, because they are what they are, a very good compromise. If you're expecting a lens that will reach out across a dark night and grab a shot of lovers making out by the beach, then you don't want these lenses, but if you're looking for a good general walkabout lens, both will suit you and they won't break your bank.
But they don't have image stabilization and when Sigma came out with it, I had to have it. So I shelved the Sigma zoom I had, (thankfully I didn't sell it) and bought the Sigma 18-200 OS and Sigma's Optical Stabilizer worked great. I got sharper handheld shots in lower light, but they came at a price, almost half a pound. It doesn't sound like much, eight ounces (7.6 to be exact), but try carrying it around on your shoulder all day long. I really noticed the difference, especially when I was shooting.
I probably wouldn't have gone to that auction site with my fairly new lens, if it hadn't been for Tamron. They came out with their Tamron 18-250 and I had to have it. A bigger reach, the heck with image stabilization. Not only could I go all the way from 27 to 375mm in the real world, but I got back a bit over six ounces, the lens was lighter. So now I had two super zooms, which was good, because I go out people shooting with my sister a lot.
So one would think I'd be satisfied, but when the Nikon 18-200 came out, well Nikon optics in a superzoom. I had to have it, so the Tamron went up for auction (because I just loved the Sigma, even though it didn't reach as far). The Nikon lens focused faster, but not that much faster then the other two, had image stabilization and was faster at the long end and it took great shots, but it weighed more than the other lenses, coming in at a whopping 20 ounces and it was creepy, creepy, creepy and with no zoom lock. The other lenses had almost no zoom creep and they had a zoom lock, which I never used. Very annoying the zoom creep was, still, great shots from a great lens.
Satisfied, well for awhile, then came 2008 and the Tamron 18-270 with their VC version of image stabilization and up for auction went my expensive Nikkor lens. Yeah, I still hung on the my first super zoom, the Sigma. For sure the Nikkor was a five star lens, but a girl can't justify more than two super zooms at any one time.
The Tamron lens actually weighed a fraction less than the Nikkor it replaced. It was a bit slower on the long end, was a bit stiff in the zooming, but easy to get used to and almost no, sometimes no, zoom creep and it has a lock. It's just simply one heck of a lens. Sometimes it's a bit slow to autofocus in lowlight, but still I think it finds its focus faster than I would, but not as fast as the Nikkor.
I should add here that Nikon has upgraded their 18-200 adding a zoom lock. I've played with one and not only have they added that zoom lock, but it doesn't seem to creep nearly as much, but that could just be the copy I used. I should also mention that Sigma has come out with their Sigma 18-250 OS which I was lucky enough to use for a month. That is just one super fine lens. It focuses fast and I think it finds its focus better in low light than the Tamron 18-270. Also this new Sigma has a super quiet motor, though I've never really been bothered by the sound of a focusing lens.
By reading other reviews of these lenses, I've learned that they are all subject to zoom creep, so I suppose in the main, I've been lucky. All of these lenses are very good, at least all of the copies I've used. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend any of them. However, if you go with Nikon, you're going to be paying an awful lot more. You get a slightly faster lens on the long end and you get Nikon quality, but Sigma and Tamron give quality as well and Tamron warranties their lenses for six years, so they're pretty confident that they're building a great product (and now they're part of Sony).
So through my whole super zoom experience, which one do I wind up using the most? You guessed it, that Sigma I bought five years ago. Like the proverbial Timax, "It takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'." If the day is bright and I'm going people shooting it's the one I put on my camera, because it's light and it's images are true.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 12
|
|
|
Information
about prices, products, services and merchants is provided by third
parties and is for informational purposes only. ShootItPhoto.com does
not represent or warrant the accuracy or reliability of the
information, and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or
delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising
from its display or use.
Amazon.com is a trademark of Amazon.com
Copyright © 2009, All Rights Reserved
In association with Amazon,com CERTAIN CONTENT THAT APPEARS ON THIS SITE COMES FROM AMAZON SERVICES LLC. THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE OR REMOVAL AT ANY TIME. Powered by ForThePickney.com
 | | Shoot It! Postcard Messaging | Get it now on ...
 |
|
|
|
