Digital SLR Cameras Forum

Digital SLRs Forum Discuss digital SLRs, lenses, RAW conversion, or anything else related to digital SLRs. You may also want to see the Nikon, Canon, and Sony camera forums.
Digital Camera Pro Reviews >>
Read and Write Digital SLR Reviews >>
Digital SLR Buyer's Guide >>
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Member photofun's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    fort lauderdale, florida
    Posts
    55

    zoom lens quality

    What about one of those 28-200 or the 80-400 Nikon pieces?
    Is that pushing the limits of zoom lense quality?

    Is it better to get separate wide angle and zoom or a combination lens?

    Advantages, image quality, weight, number of lenses???

  2. #2
    Check out our D300 Pro Review! deckcadet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Gainesville, Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,189

    Re: zoom lens quality

    The more distinct a lens is, the better able it is to cover what it is designed for.

    The 80-400 is a dedicated telephoto but slow. It is however an excellent lens.

    A 28-200 is technically a larger range as far as field of view. These lenses are cheaper and will not be of such good quality. Instead consider a separate lens.
    Harrison
    Nikon Forum / Digital SLR Forum Moderator | moderator bio
    Check out our new Nikon D300 Pro Review D3 review coming soon...
    Nikon Samurai #9 | NPS Member
    10 Lenses 5 Bodies 3 Macs 1 Sore Back

  3. #3
    has-been... another view's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    7,649

    Re: zoom lens quality

    I've used the 80-400 and it is a very nice lens, but not cheap. The VR is also a great feature in a lens like this, but I'll agree that it's slow to focus. I had a Tokina 80-400 (no VR function) which was about half of the price. In the 80-200 or maybe 300 range, it was as sharp as my Nikon 80-200 f2.8 - really. I have a couple of 16x24 prints from my 6mp DSLR with it that are very sharp. Above 300mm, it wasn't the greatest but that's pretty common among lenses like this. I understand the Nikon is better at the long end but didn't try it myself.

    The 28-200 or similar lenses are a compromise. What you gain in convenience you may lose in image quality or focusing speed. If you're not using a tripod, there might not be much difference. I know someone who took a lens like this to Europe on a bus tour and he said that the convenience was great because they didn't have long at each stop. That way he didn't have to carry a big bag and take time to switch lenses, etc. Nice images from it too, but he didn't have any big prints.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •