 |
Nikon 18-70 f/3.5-4.5G AFS DX
|
|
Review Date: Sep 18, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Good Nikon glass.
|
|
Cons:
|
I have to BLAST Nikon on this - they are really making CHEAP lenses. The glass is nice, I understand that. However, the lenses they are making (18-55, 18-70, 18-135) for the D80 and others are cheap plastic garbage. It is highly insulting as a consumer paying Nikons top dollar to get platic mounts and a K-Mart feel to the lens. My very inexpensive Quantaray feels like a tank compared to these lenses.
I do not care how lightweight they are, they should be build with metal mounts at a minimum. It is sad to see Sigma, Tamron and Quantaray lenses that I would rather own than a Nikon. NIKON - start putting some pride back into your manufacturing of lenses PLEASE.
|
|
|
See the CONS.
Nikon dropped the ball on this and many more of their newer DX lenses.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
|
|
Review Date: Aug 30, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $689.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Desirable range, fast and quiet focus, built well.
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive, poor quality given expectations and rants about it.
|
|
|
Expensive, dark pictures not as clear or as good as my $199 Quantaray 28-200. You all may think I am crazy, but I have tested my Quantaray against this $$$ lens over and over and the Quantaray takes better, sharper pics close up. The Canon is equal to slightly better at greater distances. Overall the Canon is a HUGE disappointment for an "L" lens I have heard so much about. I think I may swap for the Tamron 18-75 XR. I have yet to see that lens produce a lousy photo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
