Chen_Calvin

I had owned the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS HSM. It’s super sharp, sharper than the Nikon 16-85, and comparable with the Nikon 16-80 in my experience. The used one is around $200 here in Taiwan, though ...

I bought the Tamron 10-24 HLD instead for its weather proof capabilities. The image quality doesn't disappoint me as well. However, I did seriously consider this 10-20 VR for its size, weight and ...

You could refer to the review on photographylife at https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-16-80mm-f2-8-4e-vr. There are comparisons between D7500+16-80 and D750+24-120, which might relieve ...

Thanks! The prices look great.

I was once looking at the 55-200mm VR II, which is highly rated and very useful for DX. But it's hard to get one. The FX 70-200mm f/4G is a bit too long for DX and way too big and heavy for the ...

Yes, the AFS 70-300mm VR is pretty good in my experience. I was shooting the DX though.

I bought a Tamron 10-24 HLD to replace the Tokina 12-28. The Tamron has much better image quality at corners and has wider angle of view. The pictures taken by this Tamron are virtually no ...

I compared the HB-25 with the HB-63 at the store. The HB-25 has shorter petals (and is an older design). It's my perception that the HB-63 has better effect, so I got the HB-63 to replace the ...

Sorry but I meant AF-S 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 VR (2003-2010). Its filter thread is 72mm, too.

How about HB-25? It’s for the FX 24-120, so shouldn’t it fit the DX 16-80 best in terms of focal length?

I owned the Sigma 17-50/2.8 but regret having replaced it with the Nikon DX 16-80/2.8-4. Though they are both good, the constant max aperture and the size made the Sigma lens more "portable." The ...