Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rece2000" data-source="post: 191630" data-attributes="member: 15932"><p>Yes, I have done that.&nbsp; I always use the center point and recompose.&nbsp; It's what I was instructed to do in a class.&nbsp; I'm sorry, I'm starting to get off track with the intent of my original post. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; Back to that.&nbsp; Bottom line, I am going to send my camera in to Nikon for them to check for focus issues, as it does often times appear to focus on something other than the eyes of my subjects, which I always focus on.&nbsp; I think my Tamron lens just does not have the good optical quality I am looking for, so am going to try to sell and purchase a new walkaround lens--Nikkor.&nbsp; It's hard to get this across online like this, but is so obvious to me when examining them on my computer--you need to be able to zoom in to see. You had mentioned the 18-105.&nbsp; I wish it had a larger aperture, but I guess I can make do.&nbsp; My question then is, would this be a good lens for landscapes?&nbsp; Not strictly landscape photography, but for beautiful scenery.&nbsp; We are going to the caribbean next February and I want to have a good lens for capturing the scenery, plus just the everyday &quot;posing in front of neat things&quot; shots...&nbsp; Does this lens offer more than just the additional focal length than the kit lens I received with my camera (the 18-55)?&nbsp; Or, should I keep my 18-55, along with my 50mm, 85mm, and 50-200mm and maybe invest in a wider angle lens?&nbsp; Just afraid to get a lens like the 10-24mm with being primarily a portrait photographer. I don't want to get a lens that is &quot;too specialized&quot; that I won't really be able to use it on a regular basis... but do want something that would be good for general photography and the occational landscape.&nbsp; Have I explained your head off yet? <img src="http://nikonites.com/images/icons/icon7.png" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="rece2000, post: 191630, member: 15932"] Yes, I have done that. I always use the center point and recompose. It's what I was instructed to do in a class. I'm sorry, I'm starting to get off track with the intent of my original post. :) Back to that. Bottom line, I am going to send my camera in to Nikon for them to check for focus issues, as it does often times appear to focus on something other than the eyes of my subjects, which I always focus on. I think my Tamron lens just does not have the good optical quality I am looking for, so am going to try to sell and purchase a new walkaround lens--Nikkor. It's hard to get this across online like this, but is so obvious to me when examining them on my computer--you need to be able to zoom in to see. You had mentioned the 18-105. I wish it had a larger aperture, but I guess I can make do. My question then is, would this be a good lens for landscapes? Not strictly landscape photography, but for beautiful scenery. We are going to the caribbean next February and I want to have a good lens for capturing the scenery, plus just the everyday "posing in front of neat things" shots... Does this lens offer more than just the additional focal length than the kit lens I received with my camera (the 18-55)? Or, should I keep my 18-55, along with my 50mm, 85mm, and 50-200mm and maybe invest in a wider angle lens? Just afraid to get a lens like the 10-24mm with being primarily a portrait photographer. I don't want to get a lens that is "too specialized" that I won't really be able to use it on a regular basis... but do want something that would be good for general photography and the occational landscape. Have I explained your head off yet? [IMG]http://nikonites.com/images/icons/icon7.png[/IMG] [/QUOTE]

Verification