The lens suffers from similar problems as the other superzooms – sharpness and contrast vary by focal length and aperture, with the weakest numbers at the largest apertures. The performance of the lens at short focal lengths is pretty good, but anything above 105mm is average to below average. Contrast is quite poor wide open but gets better at f/5.6 and beyond. Here is how the lens compares to the 18-200mm and 28-300mm size-wise (From left to right: Nikon 18-200mm, Nikon 18-300mm, Nikon 28-300mm):

Again, nothing to be excited about. For these kinds of wildlife shots, I would rather shoot with my favorite Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S. It is significantly sharper even with the TC-14E and it produces absolutely beautiful bokeh. Vignetting Can we expect a lens that has compromised even more on image quality to actually perform not just better, but on an acceptable level? More importantly, lenses like this one cover such a vast range of focal lengths, it’s almost as if the manufacturer is implying the buyer does not actually know what he wants or, crucially, needs. I strongly believe that if you need a single lens that goes from around 28mm to 400mm and over (full-frame equivalent), you are better off with a super-zoom point-and-shoot camera. There’s just no point in owning a big, heavy DSLR with a big, heavy super-zoom lens, both of which cost a lot of money and don’t actually make much sense in terms of image quality. If you own a big, expensive kit, it should perform like a big, expensive kit. Which is to say, brilliantly. On a positive note, the lens is built well and feels solid in hands – certainly better than the Tamron and Sigma equivalents. It has a plastic barrel with plastic focus and zoom rings (the zoom ring is covered with rubber). Most of the recently-announced lenses by Nikon have a plastic exterior, which does not necessarily mean that the lenses are not solid. The interior of the Nikon 18-300mm contains plenty of metal to hold optical elements, although judging from the weight, it feels like the lens has nothing but glass. The lens mount is also made of solid metal, not plastic as in some cheap kit lenses like 18-55mm DX. Not bad, I cannot see any apparent ghosting and flares in the image. As you zoom in towards the telephoto range, however, ghosting can become an issue. DistortionWith the lens attached to a D7000, auto-focus is somewhat slower and more “hesitant” than on the AF-S Nikkor 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR. It's still noticeably faster than the AF-S 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DX telezoom, though. Thankfully the filter thread does not rotate on focus, making it that much easier to use graduated neutral density filters and polarisers. Manual focus enthusiasts should take note that the focus ring is rather narrow and located close to the lens mount. Distortion

In addition to being lighter, the new lens is also considerably shorter than the old one – zoomed out, the 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR is only 99mm long, whereas its older brother is 120mm. A petal-shaped hood is supplied with the lens, which does a decent job of shielding the front element from extraneous light that may cause flare or loss on contrast. Shooting into the light does result in a slight loss of contrast, especially at 300mm, but otherwise, this lens is quite resistant to flare. The new Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G is a compact, yet versatile all-in-one lens for ideal for travel. The AF-S Nikkor 18-300mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR was announced in June 2012, and holds the distinction of being the longest-range superzoom available for any interchangeable-lens camera system. Its 16.7x, 27-450mm equivalent zoom range trumps Tamron's 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD not only for focal length but also aperture at full telephoto. This comes at a price, though; the 18-300mm is comfortably the largest, heaviest and most expensive DX/APS-C format superzoom around.

Nikon 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor User Reviews

The obvious question then, is how well do these two lenses compare in terms of optical performance? I mounted both lenses on my Nikon D850 to try them out, as I don’t currently own a DX Nikon DSLR. The scale on the left side is an indication of actual image resolution. The taller the column, the better the lens performance. Simple. At 18mm and maximum aperture, sharpness is very good in the centre of the frame, and falling just short of good levels towards the edges of the frame. Stopping down to between f/5.6 and f/8 produces outstanding sharpness in the centre of the frame, but the clarity delivered at the edges of the frame never really improves beyond good levels at this focal length. Tipping the scales at 550 grams, the new AF-S DX Nikkor 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3G ED VR is 34% lighter than the older 18-300mm Nikon lens, although it's still about 100 grams heavier than the Tamron AF 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD.