Thom 16-85VR and 18-105 DX review is up

Started Feb 16, 2009 | Discussions thread
jack scholl
jack scholl Veteran Member • Posts: 4,218
Re: Thom 16-85VR and 18-105 DX review is up

Thom Hogan wrote:
For example, on a one-rating scale, the 16-85mm would probably get
four stars from me, the 18-200mm would now get three stars. To get a
five-star rating, a lens would really just have to have no optical
issues. The 200mm f/2G is an example of a lens I'd rate five, the
14-24mm may turn out to be another (still working through my
assessment, and that missing filter ring is something I'm still
grappling with ; ).

This in no way is meant to question your ratings and tests. I too feel you are a great resource for the nikon community.

However, we just tested 4 copies of the 18-200 and then compared them to our very good 16-85. Two of the 18-200's were noticeably inferior. Of the remaining pair, one really stood out in terms of sharpness and IQ. It was not as sharp as the 70-300 VR or the 80-400 VR (which was much sharper than the other two) at the tele end. But from 18 thru 85mm it either matched or slightly beat the 16-85. I was surprised after taking some 30 to 40 comparative shots. We are still evaluating this issue but are tempted to keep the 18-200 and pair it with the 80-400 and a super wide zoom for our "kit".

Not sure how to explain this other than copy variation . . . maybe we just got lucky on the 18-200. The difference between 24mm and 28mm is significant. But having a super wide option would make things more interesting.

Any comments are welcome.

Jack

-- hide signature --
 jack scholl's gear list:jack scholl's gear list
Sony RX1R II Sony RX10 IV
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
jfk
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow