The New 18-300 VR Lens

SimonBalaam

SimonBalaam

Messages
533
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
I'm looking at some new lenses for my D90. I was thinking of getting a 18-200VR and then a 70-300VR.

But now that Nikon have annouced the new 18-300VR lens I was thinking would it be better to pay the extra and buy that instead of having 2 lenses that will do the same as 1?

What are your thoughts on this? I know if one gets damaged I will still have another working lens but I'm also going to keep mt 18-105 kit lens too.

Any help would be great.

Thanks

Simon
 
Thanks Scott

Ah I see, a 28-300, Is there such a thing as number dyslexia??? I'm sure I have it when typing and reading numbers.

Hmm bit of a shame I was hoping it would open up to 18mm
 
At times, I would love a lens like this. For example at a recent airshow I was putting my 28-75 lens on for ground shots and in-hanger stuff, and then the 70-200 for the flying (although its not long enough). So a lot of messing around. Can see this being great for holidays... BUT the negative side is that IQ will never be as good as a smaller zoom range or prime.

Maybe one day there will be a 14-400 2.8 lens that is as sharp as a prime, but at the moment its all about comprimise.
 
cambsno said:
Maybe one day there will be a 14-400 2.8 lens that is as sharp as a prime, but at the moment its all about comprimise.
Click to expand...

ha! if a 70-200mm f/2.8 is like a mini bazooka then a 14-400 f/2,8 would be a SAM :lol:
400-Bristol_Bloodhound_SAM_missile.jpg
 
Tamron make a 28-300 VC which is surprisingly good.

For DX, you might be off with the 18-270 VC instead.
 
I used to have one and while the IQ was Ok it was really slow at focussing....gave up with it and bought two smaller range zooms that are much much better.

Neil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top