Tamron 18 200 and Nikon 18 105

For beginners, 18-105 is enough, and the image quality of this lens is not bad in the sleeve.

The 18-200 focal length is longer, but the image quality is not as good as the 18-105, and Nikon's original 18-200 lens is the best in these 18-200, but it is also the most expensive.

There is not much difference between the two. I have used Nikon 18200 18105 Sigma 18200

The first floor is more objective, and there is a problem on the second floor: 105mm is not a medium focus, but a telephoto. The mid-focus is in the range of around 50mm.

In addition, for the 18200 lens, the 135-200 focal length is of poor quality, and it is not possible to produce films at the maximum aperture, either shooting landscapes (small apertures) or playing.

If the landlord is not short of money, it will be 18-200, and if you want to take this 400 and then study some accessories, it will be 18105.

The difference between the two heads is more than 400 yuan, and the imaging quality is about the same.

Tenglong's 18-200 1800 yuan or so, one lens goes all over the world, wide-angle, medium focus, and telephoto are all covered.

Nikon 18-105 is about 2200 yuan, only wide angle and medium focus.

Add 180 to the difference of more than 400, you can do the math yourself.

It was more than ten years ago that the Tenglong lens was yellowed, and there is no such situation at present. This veteran's D7200 is equipped with a second-hand 99 new Tamron inventory (18-200mm F Di ll VC, B018), which only cost 1000 yuan. Takeron's VC stabilization is much more effective than Nikon's old VR stabilization, and good sharpness is also Tamron's consistent style.

Thanks to the use of an LD lens and a composite aspherical lens, the color of this lens is saturated, and it is quite satisfying to use. It can be compared with the original 18-200VR. The low price results in a very high price.

This lens is also the lightest of the 18-200 focal lengths, at just 400g. But the disadvantage is that the bayonet in the back is not metal, but engineering plastic. I almost always use Tamron for my shots.

Let's take a look at the sample of this lens.

18mmf/

18mmf/8

The telephoto end pulls over the effect of 200mmf 8

The shadow doesn't buy much Tenron, and if there is an original plot, choose Nikon. Nikon's color is a bit oilier than Tamron's, but it depends on personal preference.

The first and second generations of second-hand 18-200vr are very cheap, and there is no need to be a vice factory. The original 200-segment maximum aperture is still different from Tamron's. This one doesn't have a pzd supersonic motor, so it should be fine outdoors, but I don't know how to focus indoors.

No headache, it is indeed the original factory is good, regardless of optical quality or durability, the Tamron lens is cheap, but the sealing is not good, the storage is not good, it is easy to mold, and the film is yellow.

The original factory is a little better, but the main thing is that it is good in terms of compatibility performance, so the budget is not much, and it is the same for Tamron or other sub-factories, the lens generally has no quality problems, and it can be used for a long time in normal use, and Tamron also provides 5-year warranty service, Nikon original factory and other sub-factories such as Sigma are 3-year warranty. Moreover, I personally feel that if you really get started, the lens of the 18-200 will be replaced in a short time, and if you don't get started, even the machine with the lens will be quickly removed, so you don't have to worry about any life at all.

Nikon 50G or Tamron 18-200VC which is better to shoot portraits.

1. Nikon 18-200VR (hereinafter referred to as Nikon) and Tamron 18-200VC (hereinafter referred to as Tamron) are both equipped with ultrasonic motors and resin lenses, and there is no difference in service life. In addition, the same type is still Sigma 18-200C (three generations), the same material, can also be used as an alternative; 2. From the perspective of lens materials, Nikon uses 2 ED lenses and 3 aspherical lenses, Tamron uses 1 LD lens and 1 aspherical lens, Sigma uses 4 SLD lenses and 3 aspherical lenses, (ED, LD, and SLD are all low-dispersion lenses), Sigma is the most elaborate material, followed by Nikon, and Tamron is the easiest. In terms of coating quality, Nikon and Sigma's coating technology is basically the same (Nikon is slightly better), and Tamron's coating technology is a little worse, and the color has a tendency to yellow.

From the point of view of workmanship, Nikon's craftsmanship is the best (the most important of which is sealing), and the feel and "sense of luxury" are a little better; 3. As far as the quality of the lens is concerned, according to the evaluation of the world's authoritative third-party lens material evaluation agency DXO Mark Lab in France, the data is quoted as follows: the resolution Nikon and Tamron are both 6 P-MPIX, suitable.

The Tamron 11-20 Nikon bayonet came out.

This lens is not a full-frame lens, and if it is a Nikon mount, it can be used on most full-frame Nikon cameras, but the effect of a PAS (half-frame) camera is captured, which is equivalent to using a full-frame camera as a half-frame camera. If it is a Canon mount, it seems that it cannot be used on a full-frame Canon camera.

The Tenglong lens has a special Kang mount for the Nishi Travel Section, and there is a special letter logo behind the lens code. For example, the N in the Tamron SP 35mm Di VC USD (F012N) represents the Nikon mount, and if it is C, it represents the Canon mount.

The f5 can use most Nikon lenses on the market, with three exceptions:

DX lens can be used from the angle of the bayonet, but due to the small image field of the lens, there will be different degrees of black corners or vignetting, among which the fixed focus DX head can eliminate the vignetting angle more obviously after closing the small aperture (basically no black corner), typical case: DX AFS35, DX AFS40 micro. Almost all zoom DX heads don't work with F5, except if you're specifically looking for vignetting.

Which is better, Nikon 18-140 or 18-105.

In fact, the difference between the two is: 1 **, 18 140 expensive about 500 2 equivalent focal length, 18-105 28 160 ; 18-140 28 2103 18-105 uses a plastic bayonet base; The 18-140 uses a metal mount base4 Lens construction18-105: 15 elements in 11 groups (including 1 LED glass lens and 1 aspherical lens) 18-140:

12 groups of 17 elements (including 1 ED lens, 1 aspherical lens) and 18-140 focal lengths are a little more than 18-105, suitable for novices, and more importantly, the 18-140 lens mount has been upgraded to a metal mount on the Internet, which is more durable. I hope mine can help you, dear

The first three Nikon heads are all non-constant aperture dog variants, which are not comparable to the Tamron 17-50.

18-70 color is good, but the distortion control is not good, there is no anti-shake, second-hand ** can be considered, but the color is generally not too good.

The 18-135 color is average, and the distortion control is slightly better than the 18-70, but there is no stabilization, which has now been replaced by the 18-105.

18-105 color and distortion are average, but there is anti-shake and ** low, so the cost performance can be considered.

Tenglong 17-50 is a deputy factory bull head, there are A16 and B005 two models, the latter has anti-shake and slightly improved color, ** not high can be considered. The advantage of Tenglong's head is that the sharpness is not inferior to the original factory, and the disadvantage is also obvious that the color is yellowish, and there is a problem that has to be faced.

Nikon 18-70 18-105 18-135 are all original small-aperture zoom dog heads The difference is that the 18-70 18-135 three-lens ED lens is slightly better in controlling dispersion 18-105 One ED but has an extra aspherical lens It performs better than the other two in controlling distortion, especially the 18-135 Although the focal length is the longest, the wide-angle and telephoto ends are seriously distorted These three lenses are only suitable for travel shooting The focal length is practical But the aperture is small Tamron 17-50 The sub-factory standard is bull's head It is suitable for portraits, the workmanship is not as good as the original, and the others are better than the original three.

You get what you pay for, the most cost-effective is the Tamron A16, and the worst imaging is, of course, 18-105.