- Built in motor for use on the new Nikon Cameras
- Includes lens hood
- 6 year Tamron Warranty
- Zoom lock, 62mm filter size
Product Description
This Tamron AF 18-200 F/3.5-6.3 XR DI-II LD Aspherical (if) Macro is a great all around lens for all ocassions. With it’s wide zoom capability from 18-200 the focal length will meet most needs. It also has a built in motor for fast accurate focusing. Designed exclusivly for the new APS sized sensors, you can be assured it will give you sharp results. In addition to its wide zoom range, it also incorporates aspherical elements in it’s design to ensure the highest quality images. Features a slip resistant textured rubberized focus and zoom rings. This lens comes with a manufacturer’s 6 year warranty and lens hood.
Dexter @ 4:59 pm
My Nikon D90 came packaged with this lens and I’ve found that this lens can really do it for most occasions. It’s 18-200mm flexibility allows for a variety of shooting situations without the hassles of swapping out lenses on the fly. It takes sharp, crisp and clear images and is fully compatible with the D90. However I rated only 4 stars simply because of the fact that this lens does not have the VR (Vibration Reduction) feature of Nikkor lenses. To what extent this may or may not be an issue depends on the person shooting the picture but to me, its a convenience I can get by but would be nice if it had it. So, if you are looking for a lens for your Nikon DSLR, check this one out…Great flexibility (18-200mm) for most situations and good value for the money.
G. Moore @ 7:41 pm
For the money, this lens does all that is expected. Of course there are better lenses, but they cost much much more. But remember, it’s the photographer more than it is the lens… You can go the same distance in a Honda that you can in a RR or Bentley. This lens is like a very nice Honda, and it takes you where you need to go!
Tracy Simmons @ 8:05 pm
When I purchased my D80 2 years ago Tamron lens came with it, so I decided I would purchase their 18-200mm lens because I NEVER had problems.(I purchased the lens in October 2008.}Most of the time I leave the settings on auto. I went to a hockey game and that is when it happened. The camera would not take a photo. On the menu the F stop would show “F – -” and the flash icon was blinking. I could not believe this was happening. Well I sent it back for a replacement. After I got the replacement from Amazon, I was going to take pictures of my nices soccer game and guess what happned. Yes it happened again. I did read my manual and the “F – -” means there is not lens or the lens is not attached. I have not found anything on the internet of anyone else having this problem. I have updated the firmware on the camera. It worked fine for a while. The last time that this happened I unattached the lens then attached it back and it worked. I do plan on contacting Tamron. I am glad it has a 6 year warranty. It does take some great pictures. My instructor says “Its not the camera that takes a bad pictures its the person taking the photo”. I do hope that no one else has had the same problem.
Check out the reviews for the other same size lens by Tamron that is an older model.
Tiffany Ann @ 9:18 pm
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.
Sheree L. Vogt @ 11:28 pm
I’m soooo sorry I opted for this lens instead of the Nikon Brand. I should have just kept saving for the real deal. This is one of the WORST lenes I’ve ever owned and I have been a photographer for over 30 years. I got it in August and didn’t take many shots until I went on vacation at the end of September. Now I have 167 files that over a third of the image is blurry. Since I waited past my 30 days, Amazon wouldn’t help me. I sent the lens back to Tamron for warranty repair. I got it back and it is better, but still not really sharp. How disappointing! I’ve always hoped for a lens that would cover all the bases, but I guess having it be sharp is TOO MUCH to ask!!! My recommendation, is RUN the other way from this lens.
I’ve used Tamron a LOT over the years and never had a problem….this is a true lemon.