Hello!
I'm a keen amateur who enjoys, in particular, landscape photography. I also (for work) have to complete a fair amount of real estate photography and some food photography, along with some portraiture.
I currently have a Tamron 18-270mm lens and am looking to replace it. I purchased it as a travel lens a couple of years ago but honestly the image quality is not great (poor sharpness is a particular issue).
I have been advised that I should look to get three lenses - a 10-20mm lens (I already have a Sigma which has been great so far), and then have been recommended the Nikon 18-70mm and 70-200mm lenses. My question is: would the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX ED VR II be a good lens that would then cover the whole focal range, rather than having to have a separate 18-70mm and 70mm - 200mm lens?
Is there a reason (image quality?) I would be better going for two separate lenses? After my experience with the Tamron superzoom I'm a little bit hesitant about going for another superzoom.
Thank you!