- 好sharp
- 色彩較自然, 冇16-80咁鮮
- 好方便
- 勁方便

- 對焦較慢
- 光圈未到200mm 已經6.3
- 做工很一般
- 廣角變型, 比16-80 差不多
- 四角失光, 比16-80 少

估唔到14x變焦鏡可以咁sharp, 中間成像可以話只係比16-80差少少, 邊緣就兩支都不太好, 250mm端成像明顯變差, 但16-80 跟本冇呢個焦段, 我夠膽用16-80來比, 因為主觀地覺得18-250只差些許, 但價性比16-80高很多, 一比之下立刻放左支16-80. 同埋覺得 16-80 真係不值如此價格.

kkhata 更改了 2 次（最後更新：2009-10-02 12:14:27）

1. 輕便
2. 焦距方便
3. 廉宜
4. 成像可以接受
5. 色散可以接受

1. 250mm 唔足, tele side 最多只有 230mm 左右
2. 對焦頗慢 ; 我有支 70-300G SSM 係手, 如果比較 70-230 之間焦段 , 不可能有 SSM G 鏡 80% 速度 , 最樂觀只有 50% , 千萬不能吹水害人 !! 我手上用著 a700, 有齊對焦輔助鏡, 用埋 Flash 58AM 幫手都唔快多少 !!
3. 易入塵

天涯鏡的水平來說, 係性價比之滿意品

輕便，一鏡走天崖
平，我係星際買，$3320(我係中學生，我都afford得起)
用$3320就買到Made in Japan(有虛榮感)
有型，外殼起角，被fd誤會用CZ 16-80
有lock掣(比N記好)，鏡筒唔會行行下轉出黎
對焦速度好快(我用A200)，當然唔好同SSM比(都有SSM八成快)，快過龍仔個支
對焦準，拉盡250mm個景深咁淺都唔會out focus。
全焦段45cm最近對焦距離，勁正!!!
250mm成像唔係其他人講到咁差
紫邊問題可以接受，冇想像中咁差。(當然唔好同Zeiss鏡比)

天崖鏡通病:廣角端變形同黑角問題較嚴重
250mm對焦比18mm對焦時慢少少(可能景深淺o左，對焦行程大o左)
有SSM會更受歡迎
光圈細o左少少，如果好似C/N記咁做到f/3.5-5.6就好
超級伸縮鏡，拉盡250mm平衡感唔係幾好，同埋好易入塵!!!

初時用kit lens+支75-300mm。覺得好煩。因要成日換鏡，整到部機個VF入塵，比個fd恥笑。之後支長鏡壞o左，呀媽叫我順便換埋支kit lens。初時呀媽提議用18-250，我唔係好種意，因為天崖鏡比我o既感覺o係" 差勁 "。但因Tamron, Sigma支70-300mm好廢，而支
70-300G我afford唔起。所以我先入18-250。但用落支鏡都唔係咁差，比我想像中好好多。而且，一鏡o既好處數有好多，最起碼都防止部機入塵同冇藉口miss任何一個shot。最後，我希望藉e個comment，可以改變各位師兄對天崖鏡既成見!!!

輕便
長,中,近也有

對焦文字有點問題
用在a350好像有點雜訊
顏色不夠鮮
對焦會慢過kit lens
手震時會見到畫面不停移

整體來說還好,因為什麼焦距也很好,只是不能微距而巳~

etgoodhk 更改了 1 次（最後更新：2009-03-01 18:39:40）

Accurate Focus even in A100, good range and sharpness as a whole both is very good at 18mm and 250mm if stopped down to F8. However in range between the 35mm to 120mm the sharpness is just good at 8 and f11.

CA is a problem in both 18mm and 250mm and can only imporve a little bit if close down to f8 - f11. Many user complaint the focus speed of this len is slow, but I found it is acceptable even if using A100. I think we cannot expect this len for tracing sport subjects, If you use this len as a travel len, it is perfect and focusing speed will not be an issue.

Compare to 18-70 kit len, this zoom is far out perform it. However in term of sharpness and CA problem, this len is not as sharp as and have more CA than Minolta 24mm-85mm zoom under the same focal lengh and aperture. in the Long end from 70 to 250mm, this len also cannot compete with Minolta 70-210 Beer Can zoom.

However as a whole this is a good len worth for its price.

Contrast is a little bit high for my taste and since my other lens are mainly Minolta, this
Sony zoom (Tamron OEM?) has exhibit higher contrast than Minolta and hence more subitable for taking scenery rather than protrait pictures. To me, those Minolta lens produced before 1995 has the tradition color of its lens legend that both Canon and Nikon users will not understand.

Users of old Minolta lend made before 1990's can enjoy a consistency of color reproduction in taking pictures under same time frame of a particular scene no matter which focal length len he used from wide angle to tele.

However with the introduction of Zess and (Tamron OEM) Sony lens right now, user very often find differ color reproduction characteristic with different lens even taken the same shot under the same time..


As a whole this is a very good zoom worth its price and I recommend it for those who wants just one len for all daily uses..