Hey guys,
About a month or so ago you guys helped me out a great deal in deciding to purchase my Nikon D40, and i could not be happier with it. I have really started to expand and grow as a photographer in this short period of time, and im looking for some new glass. What i really feel like i want is the Nikon 18-200mm. The reviews are spectacular, and this will keep me from missing any action (im going to try some basic photojournalisim and event photography). Do any of you own this lens or have an oppinion of it?

Nikon 18-200mm VR http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00.../kenrockwellcom

Also, i just came across this lens which i think I may pick up like tommorow, lol. It seems to be perfect for the low light urban stuff i shoot.

Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Di..._sim_p_title_13

Thank you much for all of the help, Neowin may be the only respectable forum on the internet left...

I don't own the 50mm f/1.8D, but I do own the Canon equivalent - the 50mm F1/.8 MKII, but the lenses are similar enough. I'm very impressed with the lens. It's harder to get used to a prime, especially one with such a wide aperture. With the lens wide open, its very easy to miss focus due to user error, because the depth of field is extremely narrow - if the focus is off by a couple of inches it can make things look really bad. But it produces stunning stuff once you know how to use it and shooting in low light without flash is very fun.

I know a couple of people with the 50mm F/1.8D AF Nikkor and I've heard no complaints about that either

You can't go wrong with either lens. I have the 50mm F1.8 and it's an awesome lens for only $100.

i use to have the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 lens. Just know that you'll have to manual focus that lens with your D40. If your willing to learn and do that, its brilliant.

Personally--I failed to see what was in the hype for the 18-200 after using it. I mean there's no doubt that it's a great walkaround lens for general use given the 11x zoom range, but the price tag just seems a bit too much for the build and optical quality of the lens. (the distortion really my largest hitch)

In contrast though, the Nikkor 50 1.8D is fantastic. It's optically the same as the Canon 50 1.8 but build is far better and doesn't feel like a toy. (higher priced--similar to the Canon 50 1.8 mark I)

Just be aware that this will be manual focus on your D40.

no experience with the 18-200 you're looking at but the 50mm is fantastic. Keep in mind it ends up being 75mm on a digital...personally I liked it a bit better on my film camera where it really was 50mm, but it's still nice on my D80.

another vote for the 50 f1.8. having wider aperature gives you a lot of nice creative control with nice bokeh/focus effects.

Also own the 50 1.8 and absolutely love it. It is a very sharp lens, very quick focusing (d200) and produces some fantastic results.

Ok, im going to go ahead and buy the 50 f1.8 tonight, but im going to leave the 18-200 alone. I think i may go with nikon's 55-200 Vr... Any opinons on that lens at all?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr.htm

thanks

the 55-200 VR is a fantastic lens for the price imo. Good IQ and the VR really helps the hand shake.

Remember, 2 lenses will always be better quality compared to 1 that does all the range. But an all in one lens like the 18-200 is awesome while traveling and when you dont necessarely have the time to switch lenses. You lose on IQ a bit but you almost never switch lens. It depends what you want

Well, i just orderd the 50 1.8,( I have never really liked autofocus anyway, and it will be fun to experiment) and im going to buy the 55-200 VR in the next few days. I will buy the Nikon 12-24 when santa clause puts a well paying job in my stocking next year

Thanks again to all of you, i will post again when i recive the 50 1.8 in a few days...

apparently the 18-55mm vr is a very good lens, and it's cheap. I think I might pick one up for myself.

Instead of buying the 12-24 Nikon, there's a lot of recommendation to go for the Tokina 11-16mm instead. It's MUCH cheaper, and seems to actually make better pictures. One review: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm

You know what, i may get this instead of a zoom. Im going to British columbia in August and i think my focus is going to be land scape. I was un aware of the Tokina 11-16mm. But now i need to make a decision...The reason i wanted zoom in the first place was to explore street photography, but i dont think i can turn down that wide angle for everything else i do (skyline, urban, cityscape)....

The tokina that's 11-16mm is f2.8. There's a cheaper wide angle, that I have, it's 12-24mm f4. It's an awesome lens. It's super sharp, even wide open.

I believe the nikon 12-24mm is f4 while the nikon 14-24mm is f2.8.

the price difference between the Tokina 12-24mm and the 11-16mm is only $70: http://www.adorama.com/TN1116NK.html and http://www.adorama.com/TN1224NKAF.html

Honestly, I'd pick up the 11-16mm as it is the better lens. Unless of course you really wanted it to zoom to 24mm...

Well damn, I got gypped. I only bought the 12-24mm about 7 months ago.

I wouldn't worry about it, new lenses come out all the time. It's just like computer hardware, no matter what you always feel a bit ripped off when something new comes out. The main thing is you already have a damn good lens.

Yea, I'll survive

the tokina f/2.8 wide lens is awesome. I've tried it recently and found it better over the nikkor f/4.
Unfortunatly, tokina doesn't sell lens in canada

None? At all?

BH ships internationally. Sigma4less might too though I'm not sure.