View Single Post
Old 06-01-2006, 01:01 PM   #29
Bonjour43MA
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
Bonjour43MA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,764
Thanked 281 Times in 96 Posts
Failed 64 Times in 25 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Rikaro
18-200? there's no good lense for the canons with this range, not even the Tamron
infact there's none that is good at this range
even the 18-200 VR from nikkor is overrated. distortion, bad bokeh, and a slow zoom. It happens to be not that sharp as well.

the distortion is no worse than any other super-zooms. at 18mm it's quite bad but so is everything else out there.

bokeh... find me a consumer zoom lens that has good bokeh, please. it's not just the 18-200 VR.

slow zoom... again, find me a super zoom that is faster than this. at 200mm , f5.6 is acutally pretty good. With VR you get a couple more stops for handholdability.

Sharpness, the copy I tried was good, about the same as the 18-70 ,and that says a lot about it because the 18-70 is pretty good for a cheap zoom lens.

If you compare any of these lense with the pro ones (any Canon L lens or any Nikon ED lens) then sure it's not as good, but it also doesn't cost 1500 or 2000 bucks.

At $899 (it was $799 when announced but stupid Nikon jacked up the price), find me a lens that goes from 18 to 200, with VR and AF-S, and produces similar image quality.

The closest is the 17-85 IS and that thing is nowhere near as good as nikon's 18-200.

Overrated? Only beucase of the huge demand.
__________________
Nikonian

Last edited by Bonjour43MA; 06-01-2006 at 01:09 PM.
Bonjour43MA is offline   Reply With Quote