Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
DX vs FX
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cal41" data-source="post: 6764" data-attributes="member: 2593"><p>But it isn't GM or Nikon doing these reviews (like you say, you don't usually see manufacturer's publications highlighting limitations or ignoring product lines), it is third party reviewers in both mine and your initial examples. Unless there is a big fat juicy target (an expensive lemon), journalists will generally give nothing but praise to the high ticket items.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I know what you're saying though and it has affected my thinking as well.</p><p></p><p>I bought my D5000 with the basic 18-55mm kit lens because I didn't have a ton of money and I didn't know any better, having shot digital PNS for years after getting out of 35mm SLRs. And I did the same thing, started reading reviews and thinking I should have got a better quality lens than the basic, cheap, DX 'kit lens'.</p><p></p><p>So for my next lens, I got a 70-300mm VR FX lens. Partially because I wanted the extra reach compared to the 55-200mm (the 55-300mm hadn't come out yet), partially because it was a better build quality, and partially because... well... you never know if there might be an FX camera that comes along that doesn't weigh as much as a brick or cost an arm and a leg.</p><p></p><p>But after I got it, turning the zoom ring from 200mm to 300mm was quite disappointing compared to the extra weight and couple hundred bucks I spent. IQ and AF is better, but hardly noticeable. But of course, reading the reviews gave me validation for my purchase--even in comparison to the 55-300mm. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>Now that I've lived with both of these lenses for a while, I am satisfied with them both. The focus on the 70-300mm is lightning fast and I like having the manual focus override. The 18-55 is nice and light to carry around when I am not shooting aircraft, animals, sports, and portraits. The pictures with both lenses, of course, are better than anything I ever shot before. Only the subject matter, lighting, and composition needs some work. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite9" alt=":eek:" title="Eek! :eek:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":eek:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cal41, post: 6764, member: 2593"] But it isn't GM or Nikon doing these reviews (like you say, you don't usually see manufacturer's publications highlighting limitations or ignoring product lines), it is third party reviewers in both mine and your initial examples. Unless there is a big fat juicy target (an expensive lemon), journalists will generally give nothing but praise to the high ticket items. I know what you're saying though and it has affected my thinking as well. I bought my D5000 with the basic 18-55mm kit lens because I didn't have a ton of money and I didn't know any better, having shot digital PNS for years after getting out of 35mm SLRs. And I did the same thing, started reading reviews and thinking I should have got a better quality lens than the basic, cheap, DX 'kit lens'. So for my next lens, I got a 70-300mm VR FX lens. Partially because I wanted the extra reach compared to the 55-200mm (the 55-300mm hadn't come out yet), partially because it was a better build quality, and partially because... well... you never know if there might be an FX camera that comes along that doesn't weigh as much as a brick or cost an arm and a leg. But after I got it, turning the zoom ring from 200mm to 300mm was quite disappointing compared to the extra weight and couple hundred bucks I spent. IQ and AF is better, but hardly noticeable. But of course, reading the reviews gave me validation for my purchase--even in comparison to the 55-300mm. ;) Now that I've lived with both of these lenses for a while, I am satisfied with them both. The focus on the 70-300mm is lightning fast and I like having the manual focus override. The 18-55 is nice and light to carry around when I am not shooting aircraft, animals, sports, and portraits. The pictures with both lenses, of course, are better than anything I ever shot before. Only the subject matter, lighting, and composition needs some work. :o [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
DX vs FX
Top