Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="goz63" data-source="post: 6559" data-attributes="member: 1557">Have you noticed that FX lenses get the press while DX lenses, no matter the image quality, seem to be left behind in the reviews? Super-zooms are well known for their versatility but are not "king" for image quality. They may be very good but will never compete for the top IQ lens award. Now enter the new 28-300mm FX lens by Nikon. When anyone ever talked about the 18-200 DX lens, it always had the aforementioned limitations quoted. The new 28-300 has met with accolades of how excellent it is. While I believe it is an excellent lens, no qualifiers seem to be attached. As a super-zoom it will always have those limitations. Now we can also look at the 70-300mm VR zoom. It has been lauded as an excellent lens ( and it is). The new 55-300mm VRII zoom IMO is equally as good if not better but you aren't hearing much about the comparison. At least I am not. Again we are talking about the 70-300 as an FX lens and the 55-300 a DX. Last but not least come so called "kit lenses". These at times are synonymous with "cheap". That is until the 70-300mm VR lens was added to the D90 "kit'. No one ever called that lens a "kit lens" or down graded it because it was bundled with a camera. My 18-105 VR that was bundled with my D90 is an outstanding lens and has taken many wonderful pictures. I certainly don't consider it an inferior lens because it was bundled with the camera. Actually I probably would have purchased it anyway. This may be more of a blog entry but I needed to rant this Sunday morning. FX lenses are outstanding and do an excellent job. I just believe that we have some equally outstanding lenses on the DX side but they seem to get less recognition due to a DX stigma, regardless of the resulting image quality attained.</blockquote>

Verification