Some Nikon lens comparison photos

[YEKCIM]

If interested:

http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j11/fasteddiew/Nikon D50 Lens Tests/

~YEKCIM

 

[tinksdad]

If interested:

http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j11/fasteddiew/Nikon D50 Lens Tests/

~YEKCIM

Interesting! That 18-135mm looks pretty sharp, how do you like it?

 

[Gdad]

Ed-

I really like the look of the 10mm shot- My D70 came with an 18-70mm kit lens which has much more distortion than that looks like it has. Looking at the vertical lines in the shot- poles on the left are straight, poles on right are kicked in a bit but not bad in my opinion. I am so close to buying that lens!

Thanks for the info!

Jeff

 

[Decfish]

Interesting! That 18-135mm looks pretty sharp, how do you like it?

I'm thinking of getting the 18-135 for my D70s. I would love some feedback on how well it operates. Pictures look great.

 

[YEKCIM]

I've only had this gear for a week or so, so have not had much opportunity to play with it, but the 18-135 certainly seems to be all that I'd hoped it would be. I messed around a little with it last night, on "closeup" shots. It's not macro, of course, but I was impressed with just how close I could get. I think this lens will probably be my walkaround, and stay on the camera more than any of the others I have. I'm also sufficiently impressed with the $450 D50 that I'm seriously considering adding a second body, so as to have two focal ranges ready to shoot at a moment's notice w/o having to change lenses. I did that for years with my film SLR's and am willing to put up with the additional weight and bulk (not to mention expense!). My thinking, when I started this process, was that I could get *two* D50's for what a D80 cost, but only ordered the one D50, initially, just to be sure it would serve my needs. I saw no rational reason to spend 2X the money for the D80, and still don't.

~YEKCIM

 

[Ratpack]

I also have the 18-135 and love it. I just couldn't justify the additional money for the 18-200. It takes very good photos and I am extremely pleased with it. I use it as my walk around lens at Disney and our last trip, it never came off the camera. But now that I am getting into the prime lenses more, I like the idea of a second body instead of changing lenses.

 

[YEKCIM]

But now that I am getting into the prime lenses more, I like the idea of a second body instead of changing lenses.

Whew! Glad to know I'm not the only wacko who wants to lug two cameras around! However, I will *not* take two dslr's to Mickey's World. One, in addition to a camcorder and all the usual stuff you have to carry around is quite enough! I'm already the family pack mule.

~YEKCIM

 

[Ratpack]

Whew! Glad to know I'm not the only wacko who wants to lug two cameras around! However, I will *not* take two dslr's to Mickey's World. One, in addition to a camcorder and all the usual stuff you have to carry around is quite enough! I'm already the family pack mule.

~YEKCIM

I feel your pain. If there ever was something I needed for WDW, it would be extra arms and eyes. One set for photos and one for video.

Oh, and I notice you are going down in July, PM me your dates and perhaps we will be there at the same time.

 

[handicap18]

Nice Ed. I like the 1st one with the 10mm of the Building. The 18-135 looks pretty sharp. If I can't save enough for the 18-200mm then I will be getting the 18-135. After using the VR on the 70-300 and getting very usable handheld shots at 1/6th of a second I can see how the VR would definately come in handy for the 18-200 as a walk around lens. Nice to know that there is a more than capable 2nd option with a very good focal range in the 18-135.

Thanks for taking the time to do the comparisons and share your results.

 

[cryssi]

thanks for sharing! I will definitely use these as a reference...

 

[YEKCIM]

So far, the only one I've really used is the 18-135, and I'm very pleased with it. My wife has the 28-200 G (Christmas gift) and has not used it much, but I would think it would be a very good "DisneyWorld" lens.

~YEKCIM