What are the trade-offs of replacing an 18-55mm and 55-200mm with an 18-200mm superzoom?
Asked 5/6/2012
5 views
2 answers
0
I currently use a Nikon DX 18-55mm kit lens and a 55-200mm zoom. I'm considering replacing them with a single 18-200mm superzoom for convenience, because sometimes I don't want to swap lenses.
What are the main trade-offs of moving to an 18-200mm lens? In particular:
- How much image quality do superzooms typically give up compared with shorter-range zooms?
- Are cheaper third-party 18-200mm lenses worth considering if convenience matters more than ultimate sharpness?
- If I buy an 18-200mm, are there still situations where keeping and using the 18-55mm or 55-200mm would make more sense?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
7
It sounds like you don't like having to switch between two lenses, so you believe having a single lens would be a better solution, right?
I would encourage you to keep working with the two lenses you have. With more experience you'll have an easier time switching lenses quickly, and you'll have an easier time recognizing which lens will be most useful for a given shot. Also having a two-lens kit gives you the opportunity to only take one lens for a smaller kit when you know you don't need the full range. For example, shooting indoors with family I bet the 18-55 will be often used and the 55-200 almost never. Save some weight and size and take just the 18-55. If you were to get a bigger and heavier 18-200 you'll always have to carry it with no easy way to lighten the load, should you want to.
The lenses you have are actually very good, optically. Learn to use them well and you'll get fantastic results -- better than the Tamron, I bet. And as Pat also wrote, a lens with a larger the zoom range will have more compromises.
Originally by user8473. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user8473
14y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
The main gain is convenience: one lens covers wide to telephoto, so you swap less and are less likely to miss a shot.
The main cost is image quality. In general, the larger the zoom range, the more compromise you make. Compared with shorter-range zooms, 18-200mm superzooms often show softer detail, especially toward the edges, and more distortion at the wide end. One user comparing the Nikon 18-55 and 18-200 found the 18-55 was usually sharper, with less edge blur and less wide-angle distortion.
Cheaper third-party superzooms can still be worthwhile if convenience matters more than squeezing out the last bit of image quality. If you don’t need the highest sharpness, they may be perfectly usable.
There are still reasons to keep the two-lens kit: it can be lighter and more flexible. If you know you’ll only shoot indoors or mostly wide/normal views, taking just the 18-55 may be smaller and easier than carrying an 18-200 all the time.
So the trade-off is simple: convenience versus optical performance, size, and flexibility. If lens changes are your main problem, a superzoom may help. If image quality matters more, keep practicing with the two lenses.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Do an 18-55mm and 55-200mm together cover the same range as an 18-200mm lens?
Why choose 18-55mm + 55-250mm instead of a single 18-200mm lens?
Is a Canon 18-200mm a good all-in-one upgrade for a Canon T7?
Why are 18-200mm superzoom lenses more expensive than buying 18-55mm and 55-200mm separately?
Which lens setup makes the most sense for a college photography club with Nikon entry-level bodies?