What’s a gram worth?
As I get ready for my backpacking round-the-world trip, I’ve become very weight-conscious. Okay, backpack weight, not my weight… haha. One important piece of hardware for me is my D-SLR camera, a Nikon D90. Until now I’ve had two lenses: a lightweight 18-55 VR for everyday use, and a 70-300mm VR for zooming and sports.
For the lightest traveling, I decided to simplify to one lens. Several makers have 18-200 lenses but they all have drawbacks; in the end I went with Nikon’s own lens, with the drawback of “highest price” (~$700). For a great summary of the lens, see Ken Rockwell’s review of the Nikon 18-200 VR. After trying out the lens I agree with Ken: it’s well worth the extra cost to avoid the problems with brands like Sigma. See the photo below to compare the size of all three Nikon lenses: 18-55 VR, 18-200 VR, and 70-300 VR.
Here are the Nikon lens weight specs, where you can see the advantage of the relatively light Nikon 18-200 VR lens compared to carrying two others. All weights (from my kitchen scale) include a UV filter and lens caps (both ends).
| Lens | Weight (g) | Weight (oz) |
| Nikon 18-55mm VR | 300 | 10.5 |
| Nikon 18-200mm VR | 628 | 22 |
| Nikon 70-300mm VR | 805 | 28 |
The difference is quite a lot when you consider I’d be carrying both the 18-55 and the 70-300 lenses for a total of 1.1 kilos! By choosing just the 18-200, I easily halve that (especially after chopping the 70-300mm lens pouch and lens hood from my packing list). Ultralight travel photography, here I come, with the best Nikon lens for the job!
If you’re interested in purchasing the 18-200mm VR, please consider using this Amazon link: Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II to help support my travels.
Tags: Backpacking, Nikon D90
