Re: Ideal size boat

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 12:30:36 -0700, "RG" <rg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>
>> That *is* a nice looking lens. Have you seen any reviews on it? I bought
>> this one:
>> http://tinyurl.com/aruez and then decided it was too big to carry on the
>> trip we
>> made. Now I'm considering selling it. I ended up with the 70-300mm lens,
>> http://tinyurl.com/cn9r5, with which I've been pretty happy.
>>
>
>I've read only one review, and it was very positive. It sure ought to be
>for the money. In addition to the 18-70 kit lens, I also have the 70-300
>zoom, the ED version. At the time, it seemed like the most logical
>compliment to the 18-70 kit lens, and it was very affordable. However, in
>practice, I find it is often too long, and I find myself switching back and
>forth between the 18-70 and the 70-300 way too often. Either that or I will
>often revert to my point and shoot when I have the 70-300 on the D70 and
>need a shorter lens to get a shot off quickly. It's clumsy, and I don't
>like it.
>
>There are several inherent advantages this 18-200 lens offers over the
>18-70/70-300 combo we now use. First and foremost is to have the majority
>of the focal range of the combo in a single lens. You give up nothing on
>the short end, and still have 350mm on the long end in 35mm equivalence.
>11.1x range is not bad. I'd be more than willing to give up the very long
>end to have the 18-200 range in a single lens. Much more convenient. From
>what I can tell, it is fairly compact in size. Somewhere between the 18-70
>and 70-300 in size, which I would find acceptable for a default walk-around
>lens. Second, this lens is far superior to the 70-300 zoom. Much faster
>focusing with the silent wave motor, just like the 18-70. And third, even
>though this lens isn't really any faster nominally than the 18-70 and only
>slightly faster than the 70-300, in practicality it is much faster due to
>the VR technology. In most situations, image stabilization will give you
>2-3 stops more speed than without. Huge feature, especially if you shoot
>mostly hand-held, as I do. I have a very nice pair of Canon image
>stabilized binocs, and what the image stabilization does for them has to be
>experienced to be believed. My next lens purchase will absolutely have
>image stabilization technology incorporated into it.
>
>I'm just waiting for supply to catch up with demand, and maybe the price
>will soften a bit. But I wouldn't expect that to happen in the next six
>months.
>

I agree with everything you've said. I love the VR on my big lens, but the lens
itself is *big* and heavy. I don't like carrying a huge camera bag just because of
one big lens.

Now, if I could only find a buyer for this one... http://tinyurl.com/aruez

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes
.

Relevant Pages