There are two resources that I usually use when evaluating a lens. One is this on:
http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html
(If that doesn't work, click on the "equipment" tab at the top.)
It lists that lens as the worst optically of all the XX-300 lense they have info about. It's optically .44 out of 5... its only redeeming factor seems to be a built quality of "not so good" (**- out of ****)
The other is this one:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/
This one is mixed. One person loved it (5/5) the other two dislike it (2/5 each.) One of them ending with:
Quote:
Don't EVER think of getting this as your first lens or only lens. But if you have a well rounded kit of good lenses,. then something like this may be of interest for certain situations where quality takes a far backseat to ultra portabilty.
I wouldn't get it, but I already have several lenses that cover this range.
Usually, but not always, the wider the zoom range the worse quality (there are a few exceptions, like the Sigma 50-500, but they are rare.)
Eric