|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#21 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Posts: 94
|
![]()
Oops, my previous was posted before seeing your pics (cos I'm too dumb to notice that the thread had more than one page of posts
![]() Matt Last edited by mattyb; Aug 21, 2009 at 6:43 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
|
![]() Quote:
the 18-200 is a fantastic lens, i have always wanted one and this one came with no regreats. ![]() the picture with my daughter for some reason came out looking on the soft side when i uploaded it on to steves website, but actually the original on my home computer is tack sharp, i guess cutting down the size and quality caused that, but to honest i am very pleased with the results so far, i knew before it would compramise some quality, but to be honest , to the average eye, it would not be noticed. at 100% crop it still looks good and at 200% crop it is acceptable, i bought the 35/1.8 for when the light gets low, but the 18-200 has covered low light great so far, so i wander if i should have gotten the 10-24 instead. Dave |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,193
|
![]()
congrats on the purchase of the d90 its a great camera i have two
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
|
![]() Quote:
![]() the only draw back , is that i got the 35/1.8 for use in low light situations and so far the D90 and the 18-200 has covered everything . ![]() its water under the bridge now , but had i known i would have been this pleased, i would have gotten the 10-24 lens instead of the 35 ![]() hopefully , santa would remember me this year, as i was a good boy ![]() Dave |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|