03-27-2012, 01:58 PM
I suspect that your 18-135mm was much like my 18-105. I got some excellent shots with it, but for the most part it was blah. Then it, literally, fell apart on me.
I'm a bit leery of these super zooms. They seem to be excellent over part of their range, good over another part, and so-so over the rest.
I was disappointed with Nikon's 28-300, which made too many compromises for my tastes, so I have doubts that Nikon can pull this one off.
Nikon is doing amazing things updating primes and shorter-range zooms (e.g., the 16-35mm comes to mind).
As for consumer-level super zooms, I'll wait and see.
I used to use the 18-135mm, while sharp, the plastic mount warped and caused all sorts of issues.
I would pick the 18-270mm because I like having more telephoto reach for my everyday use. I don't find it to be too bulky but then again I am usually using larger lenses so the 18-270 is relatively light and compact.
WIth the 6 yr warranty, VC=VR, PZD=SWM, good build quality for the price, I really see no reason to get the Nikon version of any all in one lens.
Getting the 18-270 has been really nice for all around shooting. Sometimes that extra reach is just really nice to have.
I'm a bit leery of these super zooms. They seem to be excellent over part of their range, good over another part, and so-so over the rest.
I was disappointed with Nikon's 28-300, which made too many compromises for my tastes, so I have doubts that Nikon can pull this one off.
Nikon is doing amazing things updating primes and shorter-range zooms (e.g., the 16-35mm comes to mind).
As for consumer-level super zooms, I'll wait and see.
pRICE cUBE wrote:
[quote=billb]
Just twice as much ? :-)
(29 ounces )
You seem to really have liked that Tamron.
If you were replacing a 18-135 non-VR ( 14 ounces ) kit lens that's acting up, would you pick that (Tamron)( 16 ounces) over Nikon's 18-105 VR ( 15 ounces) ?
400 vs 600 $$
Except for price point, I don't ( want to ? ) understand 18-55 for a kit lens.
I used to use the 18-135mm, while sharp, the plastic mount warped and caused all sorts of issues.
I would pick the 18-270mm because I like having more telephoto reach for my everyday use. I don't find it to be too bulky but then again I am usually using larger lenses so the 18-270 is relatively light and compact.
WIth the 6 yr warranty, VC=VR, PZD=SWM, good build quality for the price, I really see no reason to get the Nikon version of any all in one lens.
Getting the 18-270 has been really nice for all around shooting. Sometimes that extra reach is just really nice to have.