 |
Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED DX VR AF-S
|
|
Review Date: Mar 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, sharp sharp. Wonderfully light and easy to handle.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality--It feels flimsy, plastic build
|
|
|
A photo mag said you should steal this lens if you can't buy it. It's a great performer. I consider it a poor man's 70-200. It sees a lot more use than my 70-200 f2.8. I don't use it unless I will specifically need the f2.8 or f4.
I got mine shortly after its introduction and paid $250 for it. I could feel ripped off, but the performance makes it a steal at almost any price.
The build quality isn't up to its higher priced bretheren, but the plastic does make it light and easy to carry.
|
|
|
|
|
Tamron 24-135MM F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical (IF) Macro
|
|
Review Date: Apr 19, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, very sharp. Great color rendition
|
|
Cons:
|
Noisy AF, Very minor CA
|
|
|
This was my second lens purchase. I learned my lesson with the Quantaray 70-300, and was not going to repeat the mistake. I purchased this and the Nikon 24-120 (original version) at the same time. In lens to lens competition the Tamron blew away the Nikon. This lens became the "always on the camera" lens with my N80. The Nikon became an RMA number.
With the Nikon D70 it is even better because of the crop factor. It becomes a very compact 200 MM lens. Along with the Tokina 12-24, I've got pretty much everything covered, except wildlife.
Pictures with this lens have gotten awards at the camera club, so it's not just me that claims this lens is sharp. Just as a test, I shot my tripod from across the room and magnified the pix on the monitor. This lens picked up a tiny mark on the nameplate I had to squint to see.
The rotating focus ring got me a few times, but I soon learned to move my fingers away from it.
This lens is proof that third-party lensmakers can and do get it right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
