EXCELLENT SUGGESTION. This is the 1st thing to try to solve any menu related problem with a Sony.

Not exactly an "excellent" review of this lens. Thanks for the link.

"16-300 Tamron - is this a versatile lens, or - a waste of money?"

It is a VERY versatile lens. My daughter-in-law recently returned from a month-long photo safari in Africa. She used a Tamron 16-300 on her Nikon and returned with thousands of beautiful images. That was the only lens she used on that trip. When she bought it a couple of years ago, she gave me her Tamron 18-270 to use on my Nikon. It too has been an excellent lens. Image quality is every bit as good or better than that obtained with my other Nikon and Sony zooms. If I were looking for a high quality, relatively compact zoom lens I would not hesitate to get either lens.

That may possibly be due to the photographer and not to the lens. I have the Tamron 18-270 and my daughter-in-law uses the Tamron 16-300 with excellent results. No problems with blurriness or image quality at all. In fact, those lenses are as good or better than some of the Nikon and Sony zooms that I have.

Congratulations on the award. I love my Tamron lens. It's a great value for the money and does an exceptional job. You should have stayed in the DFW area a while longer. We're expecting another day in the 80's but stick around. Next week the temperature will be plunging down to 40 degrees again.....almost unbearable. Enjoy that Florida sunshine while you can.

Thanks to all for the comments. Seems like it may be a condition that affects several different lenses and it may or may not be a problem. The lens gets excellent reviews. I guess the best advice would be to avoid changing lenses in dusty conditions, be aware of any dust that might be building up in the interior of the camera, and use one of the rocket blowers to keep the interior dust/dirt free. And I would monitor the condition of the sensor and let the professionals clean it if any contaminants in that area were affecting my photos.

I've been reading reviews of the Nikon 18-140 VR DX lens and most are fairly favorable about this lens. Except for Ken Rockwell's review. In it he writes of "eye blow" which is a condition of dust and dirt being sucked into the lens and camera when zooming in and out. I have not read of this condition anywhere else. Should I take this seriously?


Eyeblow

"As the 18-140mm VR DX is zoomed in and out, air pumps in and out, and you may have some air blow out of the eyepiece into your eye.

You won't usually care, but the design of the 18-140mm VR DX is such that air, and thus dirt, are pumped in and out into both your lens and your camera."

https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/18-140mm.htm

I can't add anything to gessman's comments. I agree with him completely on this topic.

His final comment on the subject made me spit my coffee all over my laptop. Thanks for the laugh.

"I was around about twenty years before Ansel moved on and I don't recall there being anywhere near the fuss that's made about him now. Seems like he was just another goober running around with a big camera."

I just don't care for digital "books" at all. I like the experience of having an actual "book" in front of me (even if it was printed in China which is where most of them come from these days). And I would be willing to buy a hard copy of Steve's book at the going rate for similar printed books. Digital books just don't satisfy my love for the printed word. But I can understand why some like staring at an iPad or a computer screen for hours at a time. I am just not into that group.

See jerryc41's post, right above yours. There is a link where you can download it. I don't think the book is available in print form.

Either filter will suit your purpose. A good quality filter will protect the front element of an expensive lens from dirt, sand, dust, and greasy fingerprints. I'd much rather clean the front element of a protective filter than the front element of an expensive lens. A good quality UV or clear filter should not degrade your images in any way.

Excellent post Bill. Thanks for posting it. Lots of good information in there to chew on.

Welcome to the forum Bill. Caution is advised with a new guy who posts something for sale with no photos and no price because similar posts have resulted in fraudulent deals in the past. Photos of your equipment and a reasonable asking price would help your sale. If you can't do that, "LET THE BUYER BEWARE" is a fair warning to prospective buyers.

I have bought quite a few pieces of photographic and electronic gear (cameras, lenses, etc.) in the recent past few years and they have all contained packets of desiccants in them. None of them were in "sealed bags". I have also purchased expensive firearms, machine parts, and metallic items, all of which were packaged with desiccants in them, and NONE of them were in "sealed bags". I think the manufacturers of these items have well-educated engineers working for them that have advised them that it might be a good idea to enclose these desiccants with their products to protect them in shipping and storage. I'm not an engineer but I'll go with the manufacturers who recommend these simple items to offer some level of protection against rust, corrosion, mold, etc. It's a cheap and easy way to possibly save an expensive repair bill down the line.

The new a6400 with the 18-135 lens is a great deal at around $1150 (Amazon price). B&H price is $1298 with the 18-135. I use that lens on an A6000 and love it. My only question on the new a6400 is "Have they improved the battery and the battery usage?" It would be nice to be able to go out on an all-day shoot using only ONE battery. That is my only complaint on the Sony line.