Posted:
Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:13 pm
by birddog114
This one is included in the first post of the author of the following thread:
http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php? ... sc&start=0
Thom Hogan has a link of it included in his review.
Posted:
Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:42 pm
by stubbsy
Why is it always me
Thread locked then unlocked - the post Birdy refers to doesn't directly link to the Bjorn review. Guess I should have checked
Posted:
Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:53 am
by stubbsy
Dilan
The Bjorn review is an interesting read since he gives it a mixed review and yet a 4 rating. The killer for me is it's distortion problems.
Posted:
Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:58 am
by birddog114
Peter,
It's, at the bottom of Thom Hogan's review:
Other tests of this lens you might want to look up:
* Amateur Photography, 4 March 2006, p.39.
* Popular Photography, April 2006, p. 67.
* Bjorn Rosslett's mini-review.
Posted:
Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:39 am
by cameraguy21773
Any zoom with a range larger than 3X makes me wonder about what compromises had to be included to make it work. I suspect that Bjorn's review is a better technical summary than Thom's in this case. Even as good as optical technology is today, the AF-S and VR wrapping on this lens must almost certainly cover up some issues and I suspect that many, over time, will find it disappointing as I, and others, did with the 24-120 VR.
Posted:
Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:33 pm
by glamy
Peter,
The rating is 4- and with all the reservations... Nothing tempting to me. As Cameraguy says, this is going to cause disappointment in the long term.
Cheers,
Gerard