Thanks Markus.
But I don't understand the results.
I compared them to those of the AF-S 16-85 and the 18-105 seems to be just as good or better on the charts.
But my friend owns the 18-105 and I have the 16-85 and we compared a while ago. We both can't fight the feeling that the 16-85 produces the better results.
In your test you rate the optical quality of the 16-85 4 stars, but the 18-105 only 3.
How does that fit?
Posts: 2,441
Threads: 320
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
You're comparing results of two different test systems, 18-105 VR on D7000 and 16-85 VR on D200.
A review of the 16-85 VR on the D7000 will follow soon.
-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
Oops, sorry, my bad.
(I knew I would fall into that trap sooner or later...)
Posts: 621
Threads: 46
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1308310801' post='9310']
Plastic down to the mount, but nonetheless very nice for the price:
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/634-nikkor181053556vr"]http://www.photozone...kkor181053556vr[/url]
-- Markus
[/quote]
Hi Markus,
Thanks for the review. For the samples you write that they are done from RAW with capture 1. Did you remove CA in the process or are they still in?
Thanks
Joachim
enjoy
Posts: 2,441
Threads: 320
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
I use C1 Express, not Pro. Express does not have CA correction, so they are still in. See the shot of the yellow tower for example.
-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com