Ball Park...what kind of zoom distance (ft/yards) accuracy does this lens have??
1375143
if I were taking a photo across a regular type street. fairly well.. it will be clear but not seem that "close" some of the photos I have are very sharp . but I always felt like I would of liked to get closer.. my initial impression was I was disappointed . A 300 is better, but neither take a tele lens very well. if I had it over to do Id just go with a 600
670067
If you mean does it have a wider field than normal I didnt notice that it did. Has a sharp picture and seems to respond properly to adjustment clicks. I've used it at 100 yds on 6 inch targets, seems OK with a max 9 magnification.
1796673
I'd put it in the 1.4 group... I love this lens. Tact sharp and can focus up close to your subject.
2060161
I have not tried it on a sports event yet but it will probably struggle in keeping with the fast action. Auto focus is 'adequate' and not pro-level. I will update this answer when i have the chance to use/test it for that. I can tell you in a moving (freeway speeds)car, shooting at mountains, trees or landscapes, it is fast and accurate.
1332330
I'm not sure what a zoom # is. It is very nearly a 4x optical zoom ( not digital ). It will give you a field of view ( based on the 35mm film camera or FF field of view ) of 90mm to 350mm due to the m4/3 sensor size which roughly has a 2X crop factor (while a Canon 6D or Nikon 7100 has a 1.6X crop factor).
547718
Kristy, I agree in principal with both of the other commenters. However, I'm not sure those answers completely address your situation. As not to compare apples to oranges, are you talking specifically about zooms or fixed lens? If you are interested in getting a zoom type lens, especially one f2.8 or faster, you are talking about some sizable dollars. Zoom range, low light capabilities, absence of distortion, cost constrictions and your personal standards create a host of considerations. But, comparing a digital fixed lenses specs to a digital zoom lens specs is not a fair caparison at all.
629121
The image quality is good, particularly for the price. Its sharper & brighter than my Nikon binoculars and not quite as good as my pricier Zeiss monocular. For objects at 300 yards, you probably want something with a higher magnification.
942879
non professional here!i am so confused by some of the pro's here ! so someone please tell me,will it work on my nikon D 60, Then, for a amature-beginner- training pants guy, how will this do for real estate, mountains, gardens, charging grizzly, kidds christmas with sants, high school photos of the kids,, antique autos, the " Hoss" an buggy, does anyone get my ideas, there is two guys on the reviewsthat sound incredibaly smart, good show, i so want to get this lens, BUT ? J.R. Massachusetts
1433437
I would say at max zoom it extends to about 6 inches. I don't have it to measure. Search on youtube for some demonstrations, that is what I did. Great lens!
504870
Ooh! I would say about 10-15 yards is where your image first becomes clear. You can not adjust for that. The first mag setting is 4 times normal sight, so its "zoomed" in to start with. U Willard a blurry image within 10 yards.
2238623
It's ok but I would recommend upgrading to a different scope if you're planning on shooting from 50-80 yards to get more zoom, but for shooting between 10-25 yards it's ok. The stated max range on the scope is 100 yards but it is hard to see small objects within that distance using the scope that comes with it. The clarity of the scope after zooming in at about 6x is blurry and useless.
1041292
I agree with the 35 F1.4 response. It is a very sharp lens and with the sale, it's priced great. WELL worth the $.
1939648
I got this because I take my camera everywhere, but don't always know what shooting conditions I'm going to encounter. I wanted the wide zoom range. It's not as sharp or fast as my 2.8L lenses, but to be fair they're also primes. But it is a fine lens to own if you need a zoom with good range. I've gotten great images from both ends of the spectrum with this one. I also own a Tamron 2.8 70-200 but I haven't even gotten it out since I got this one, since I'm mainly shooting outdoors during the day I just haven't needed anything faster.
2058093
I am using this lens primarily for sports - synchronized swimming. So far only outdoors (wish you would ask it a few months out -the indoor meet is coming up then). It is a beautiful lens for landscaping or nature shots, but so far i cannot say i am 100% satisfied with it for sports. Based on what i see, i can imagine it might be problematic with low-light conditions and sports as even outdoors it still hunts that focus point. But off course reflections can be the cause, at least for me. It probably as good as we can go at this price point, but definitely do not expect flawless photos. As to comparing it against Tamron - sorry, no experience there.
381968
2nd answer. If you mean the closest distance you're able to focus at? I can only guess at about 15 to 20 feet. If you mean the closest distance you can calculate by using the mildot system I would again guess as close as you can get a clear focused picture. Mine gives me a very clear picture fifty yards and out but I could not honestly tell you the minimum useful distance.KT
313887
not 180, but pretty darn close. I love this lens. Perfect for fitting in large landscapes..
2148233
I've taken some nice shots of football players with this lense, but they were day games. It's a bit dark when fully extended (300mm), but if your camera handles ISO's of 400 - 800 well, it can be used. IMHO, it's as good as any in this price range. Idealy you would want a faster lense for sports, and that speed will cost you.