Quote:
I don't think there's a case for rxpecting higher quality on grounds of price. Making an 18-250mm wide angle to telephoto zoom is a much more difficult and expensive process than making a 50-200mm telephoto zoom and much of the cost will be taken up with this.

The superzoom is almost certainly going to have inferior drawing than a less ambitious design (straight lines are the first things to go these days) and if there are many more elements then contrast will be slightly lower as well.

Quote:
I would say (from VERY limited personal experience and assorted reviews etc.) that it is on a par with or better then all the lenses you list except the 50-200 which, despite being a 'consumer' zoom is generally (IMHO rightly) regarded as a bit special. (the A 28-80 is not highly regarded, the 80-320 has had a mixed reception, the 18-55 is fine provided you don't want to use it wide open)

Quote:
I'm sorry I haven't entered for a while....been pretty busy.
(not that I would've won or anything...... seriously good stuff!!!)
So I was practicing with painting with light for a project I'm working on.
my entry was done in camera, with only a levels adjustment (which I had to redo after checking my laptops monitor profile), minor sharpen, and color balance.

the equipment used was a ds2, 50mm1.4 360fgz flash, umbrella and stand.
15 sec exposure, f16,

also an l.e.d. blinky lightstick and a twirly fiber optic flashlight, (both $1.00 each at a dollarama store).