WOW, looks great

The lens looks nice and the price does not. $649 is a little on the steep side, especially considering there is already an 18-70 and and 18-200 VR out that cost way less and have very good optical quality.
 
That's been the reaction of most people. Too much money. For the asking price, it would have to deliver truly outstanding "no excuses" for anything image quality, and then some. If it was priced $100-150 cheaper and was f/4.5 at the long end rather than f/5.6 I think a lot of people would change their minds.

For the most part I never need VR, but I could commonly use some extra speed either for selective focus or for low light. So in this range I'd probably opt for an 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 instead which is about as long and 2/3rds of a stop faster at the long end.
 
Personally, I just don't see it.

Another slow, overpriced zoom VR lens. Compare this $650 to the $200 18-55 VR of about the same speed.

Am I missing something here?
 
I see what you are saying, I thought the range is what was interesting. And as I am looking for a new lens, I thought that was a nice lens.
 
maybe if it was 2.8 constant?

It would be nice if it was faster. Would probably end up in my bag. As it is, ill pass
 
I see what you are saying, I thought the range is what was interesting. And as I am looking for a new lens, I thought that was a nice lens.

Interesting but way over-priced. I just bought the 18-200, which is also pricey but more bang for the buck.
 
Interesting but way over-priced. I just bought the 18-200, which is also pricey but more bang for the buck.

I am sure today is the D day, the moment of truth, am I right?
Please tell us the IQ of this lens as I am sure others also eager to know once you run it thoroughly.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top