Wider still and wider. Nik 12-24
Very nice range of focal length. Dramatic perspectives. Flare not too bad. Distortion pretty damned poor.
Was expecting a little bending - given it's being a plastic cheapo - but it's much worse.
Architecture, rectilinear objects, seascapes, anything showing the horizon - all out to an embarassing degree..
Photoshop's "Undo the Lens Distortion" tricks can't properly sort it. Straight lines are not merely bent but wavy.
Made a foolish mistake in popping-on the polariser on top of the UV filter - vignetting appears, though not symetrically, leading to the supposition the optical axis is not maintained concentrically by the plastic barrels.
Plastic lens generality: The familiar smooth damping in the zoom and focussing afforded by metal helix and kilopoise grease gives way to a flimsy, gritty feel in plastic mouldings. (I daresay it would be difficult to have a viscose feel to the manual zooming focussing AND an autofocus mechanism, but then that's the challenge!
Given the CNC technology available today for machining metals it's a real retrograde step using polycarb or whatever it is. I am surprised it passed QA as a viable Nikon product given their history of excellence and my previous happy experience of their products from the F1 onwards. (yes, that old)
It will have to go to the e-bay pastures - soon as I find a replacement - I am looking.
Wavy horizons, buildings, curbs, etc.
Distortion is unavoidable with the wide angle this lens offers. It's perspective distortion, not a fault of the optics
Distortion on this lens is pretty limited for a zoom lens with this angle of view. It has substantially less barrel at the wide end and pincushion at the long end on DX than any of the full-frame Nikkors of equivalent focal length used on full-frame cameras. The distortion is pretty nicely corrected in ACR. Used this lens for years and found it a durable and useful tool on the D200 and D300s.