Quote:
Originally Posted by slodave
I disagree with you , Todd. As far as the lens, the 18-200 is a good walk around lens. We've tested it against all sorts of Nikon lenses and it is sharp. I'm looking at a number of my dads large prints as I type this. If you are on vacation, you don't want to be limited to 50mm. You want something that covers a whole range.
|
It is fine as a walkaround lens. But it will not push the limits of a decent 16MP sensor - the lens will be the limiting factor wrt resolution. It will not be as good as a fast 50 or other prime lens. It also will not be as good as a fast (and expensive) 24-70/2.8. Again, it is good for what it is but long range zooms are always a compromise.
When I was back in TN I took three lenses with the Oly - 12-50 kit (24-100 equivalent), 25/1.4 and 45/1.8 primes (50 and 90mm equivalent). I shot the zoom during the day when I had good light, the small primes at night. It was perfect. A broad zoom would have been a compromise that would have resulted in half my shots being crappy.
I'm still back to the question of what is lacking with the current setup. For most current cameras, it is *not* the sensor. You do not need 24mp or 36mp to make great photos. There are a bunch of amazing 16mp sensors (the Sony one in particular - Sony and Pentax use it as does Oly) that are incredible and you are limited only by the lens, not the body.
If it is AF performance, then that is one issue. If it is resolution and sharpness, that is another. But in general primes will always outperform zooms, so if resolution and sharpness are the problem then some good primes can be an answer. If someone has a relatively recent body, a newer one often is the answer to a question that doesn't need to be asked...