Professional Web Applications Themes

Nikon 24-120 VR - Photography

Hi all :-) I used to own the original 24-120, and didnt think it was bad at all, even at 120 - Im wondering if this new version a complete departure in optical design, or more of an update?...

  1. #1

    Default Nikon 24-120 VR

    Hi all :-)

    I used to own the original 24-120, and didnt think it was bad at all, even
    at 120 - Im wondering if this new version a complete departure in optical
    design, or more of an update?


    Tim O'Connor Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    "Tim O'Connor" <tbospams.bigpond.net.au> wrote:
    >Hi all :-)
    >
    >I used to own the original 24-120, and didnt think it was bad at all, even
    >at 120 - Im wondering if this new version a complete departure in optical
    >design, or more of an update?

    Obviously the new lens has significantly altered optics due to the
    need to incorporate the VR elements and mechanism. Until actual
    production samples are in the hands of honest reviewers (and that cuts
    out a great many magazines and web sites) we can only speculate.


    T P Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    T P <tpnospam.com> wrote:
    >Obviously the new lens has significantly altered optics due to the
    >need to incorporate the VR elements and mechanism.
    .... not to mention the AF-S system!


    T P Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    Well my partner grabbed his before I got mine and popped a wedding on it and
    the results were fabulous.
    Even I am amazed and I had good luck with the conventional 24-120. Feels
    heavier and a tad more solid.
    I also used the 12-24 digital lens on my d100 and the results are on my
    webpage.
    --
    (B>)# I wish you well.....
    Al Jacobson
    Website: [url]www.aljacobs.com[/url] see Gen. Tommy Franks, Robert Di Nero, Wayne
    Newton,and a host of others






    "T P" <tpnospam.com> wrote in message
    news:8tl2hvk8oflle3vf491l19aim1qeaa1t5b4ax.com...
    > T P <tpnospam.com> wrote:
    >
    > >Obviously the new lens has significantly altered optics due to the
    > >need to incorporate the VR elements and mechanism.
    >
    > ... not to mention the AF-S system!
    >
    >
    >

    ajacobs2 Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    >Subject: Re: Nikon 24-120 VR
    >From: "ajacobs2" [email]ajacobs2tampabay.rr.com[/email]
    >Date: Sun, Jul 13, 2003 6:37 PM
    >Message-id: <iFhQa.12533$k85.732911twister.tampabay.rr.com>
    >
    >Well my partner grabbed his before I got mine and popped a wedding on it
    >and
    >the results were fabulous.
    >Even I am amazed and I had good luck with the conventional 24-120. Feels
    >heavier and a tad more solid.
    >I also used the 12-24 digital lens on my d100 and the results are on my
    >webpage.
    Hi Al:

    What was so "amazing" about the lens? Any links to some specific pictures taken
    w/ it (wedding or otherwise) on the web that would show its "amazingness" ;-).
    I truly am curious as to its quality/usefulness, all joking aside.

    TIA

    Regards,

    Lewis

    Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

    [url]http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm[/url]

    Remove "nospam" to reply
    Lewis Lang Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    [email]contaxmanaol.comn[/email]ospam (Lewis Lang) wrote:
    >
    >Hi Al:
    >
    >What was so "amazing" about the lens? Any links to some specific pictures taken
    >w/ it (wedding or otherwise) on the web that would show its "amazingness" ;-).
    >I truly am curious as to its quality/usefulness, all joking aside.
    >

    Without pre-judging Al's response, the designers at Nikon attempted to
    take advantage of the opportunity to cure the softness and pincushion
    distortion of the previous version at the longer focal lengths (above
    80mm or so). I understand from my contacts in Japan that the design
    team feel that they have largely achieved their objective.

    Also, the opportunity must surely have been taken to produce a lens
    whose exit rays are near parallel in order to suit digital SLRs.

    We should not expect miracles from a 5X zoom lens that starts at 24mm,
    but if anyone can make an affordable silk purse in this focal length
    range, it will be Nikon. The previous version was a very good 24-85mm
    lens with the option of going to 120mm, but with "sow's ear" (poorer)
    performance at those longer focal lengths.

    (just my $0.02)

    T P Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    "T P" <tpnospam.com> wrote in message
    news:oq35hv06unmkq544c5v6j6bujng9f5h0oj4ax.com...
    > Without pre-judging Al's response, the designers at Nikon attempted to
    > take advantage of the opportunity to cure the softness and pincushion
    > distortion of the previous version at the longer focal lengths (above
    > 80mm or so). I understand from my contacts in Japan that the design
    > team feel that they have largely achieved their objective.
    >
    > Also, the opportunity must surely have been taken to produce a lens
    > whose exit rays are near parallel in order to suit digital SLRs.
    What effect, in your opinion, will this have on a film camera?

    thanks for the information btw.
    > We should not expect miracles from a 5X zoom lens that starts at 24mm,
    > but if anyone can make an affordable silk purse in this focal length
    > range, it will be Nikon. The previous version was a very good 24-85mm
    > lens with the option of going to 120mm, but with "sow's ear" (poorer)
    > performance at those longer focal lengths.
    It was definitely softer at the long end, but good enough for 4x6 er's :-)
    (what isnt I guess :-))
    > (just my $0.02)
    >

    Tim O'Connor Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    >Subject: Re: Nikon 24-120 VR
    >From: T P [email]tpnospam.com[/email]
    >Date: Mon, Jul 14, 2003 11:16 AM
    >Message-id: <oq35hv06unmkq544c5v6j6bujng9f5h0oj4ax.com>
    >
    >contaxmanaol.comnospam (Lewis Lang) wrote:
    >>
    >>Hi Al:
    >>
    >>What was so "amazing" about the lens? Any links to some specific pictures
    >taken
    >>w/ it (wedding or otherwise) on the web that would show its "amazingness"
    >;-).
    >>I truly am curious as to its quality/usefulness, all joking aside.
    >>
    >
    >
    >Without pre-judging Al's response, the designers at Nikon attempted to
    >take advantage of the opportunity to cure the softness and pincushion
    >distortion of the previous version at the longer focal lengths (above
    >80mm or so). I understand from my contacts in Japan that the design
    >team feel that they have largely achieved their objective.
    >
    >Also, the opportunity must surely have been taken to produce a lens
    >whose exit rays are near parallel in order to suit digital SLRs.
    >
    >We should not expect miracles from a 5X zoom lens that starts at 24mm,
    >but if anyone can make an affordable silk purse in this focal length
    >range, it will be Nikon. The previous version was a very good 24-85mm
    >lens with the option of going to 120mm, but with "sow's ear" (poorer)
    >performance at those longer focal lengths.
    >
    >(just my $0.02)
    Thanks Tony. Makes me wonder when Minolta and Pentax will come out w/ like
    lenses, or when Nikon will come out w/ something between the N80 and the F100
    (w/ highspeed wireless TTL flash) ;-).

    Regards,

    Lewis

    Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

    [url]http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm[/url]

    Remove "nospam" to reply
    Lewis Lang Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    "Tim O'Connor" <tbospams.bigpond.net.au> wrote:
    >
    >What effect, in your opinion, will this have on a film camera?
    IMO the effect will either be neutral or good. There cannot be any
    particular virtue or benefit in having light rays strike film at
    oblique angles, and the opposite may well be true.
    >thanks for the information btw.
    That's OK. I'm glad you find it interesting.
    >> We should not expect miracles from a 5X zoom lens that starts at 24mm,
    >> but if anyone can make an affordable silk purse in this focal length
    >> range, it will be Nikon. The previous version was a very good 24-85mm
    >> lens with the option of going to 120mm, but with "sow's ear" (poorer)
    >> performance at those longer focal lengths.
    >
    >It was definitely softer at the long end, but good enough for 4x6 er's :-)
    >(what isnt I guess :-))
    Exactly! I was never a fan of the 24-120mm AF-D Nikkor because of its
    poor performance at the long end. That was until someone pointed out
    to me that it was an *excellent* performer between 24mm and 85mm. He
    was right, and I was more than happy to change my view of this lens.

    The other guy's view was also borne out by the fact that there are
    many travel photographers who swear by (not at!) this Nikkor.

    ;-)

    T P Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    "David Ruether" <rpn1no-junk.cornell.edu> wrote:
    >
    >The early sample of the earlier Nikkor 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 was as described
    >(well, not soft above 85mm or so, but the corners softened some, and it was
    >rather slow...), but late samples appear generally to be quite good throughout,
    >with stopping down a stop advisable toward the short end for best contrast.
    >Overall, the non-VR 24-120 is an excellent zoom, and more consistent
    >among samples than the 28-105 - and I rewrote my review of it based on
    >the later information (see: [url]www.ferrario.com/ruether/articles.html[/url]).

    That's interesting, David. Thank you.


    T P Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    I shot a roll yesterday on a tripod, and have shot some using the VR
    function. So far, it looks like an improvement. I'll have the negs tomorrow,
    and will post some samples and comments in a couple of days.

    "Tim O'Connor" <tbospams.bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
    news:uE7Qa.101115$fC.813128news.easynews.com...
    > Hi all :-)
    >
    > I used to own the original 24-120, and didnt think it was bad at all, even
    > at 120 - Im wondering if this new version a complete departure in optical
    > design, or more of an update?
    >
    >

    bowser Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    [email]contaxmanaol.comn[/email]ospam (Lewis Lang) wrote:
    >Thanks Tony. Makes me wonder when Minolta and Pentax will come out w/ like
    >lenses, or when Nikon will come out w/ something between the N80 and the F100
    >(w/ highspeed wireless TTL flash) ;-).

    If only the decision makers at camera manufacturers
    possessed an imagination such as yours, Lewis!

    In the meantime, use an off-brand Nikon-dedicated TTL
    auto flash gun with a deep red filter on the F100, and
    an SU-4 slave on your second gun ... ?


    T P Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR


    "T P" <tpnospam.com> wrote > IMO the effect will either be neutral or good.
    There cannot be any
    > particular virtue or benefit in having light rays strike film at
    > oblique angles, and the opposite may well be true.

    Isn't this one of the smaller format virtues?


    Wes J Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    >Subject: Re: Nikon 24-120 VR
    >From: T P [email]tpnospam.com[/email]
    >Date: Tue, Jul 15, 2003 1:34 PM
    >Message-id: <2j08hvcqulfbdmj68d73oenakeqf9q9bln4ax.com>
    >
    >contaxmanaol.comnospam (Lewis Lang) wrote:
    >
    >>Thanks Tony. Makes me wonder when Minolta and Pentax will come out w/ like
    >>lenses, or when Nikon will come out w/ something between the N80 and the
    >F100
    >>(w/ highspeed wireless TTL flash) ;-).
    >
    >
    >If only the decision makers at camera manufacturers
    >possessed an imagination such as yours, Lewis!
    >
    LOL :-) My funny bone and my ego thank you very much ;-)
    >In the meantime, use an off-brand Nikon-dedicated TTL
    >auto flash gun with a deep red filter on the F100, and
    >an SU-4 slave on your second gun ... ?
    Nah, I'll just have to wait till Konolta or Pentax or Canon buys up Nikon and
    does it right! ;-) :-)

    Does anybody know if the current 24-120 "regular" Nikon zoom or the new 24-120
    VR is as excellent optically in sharpness/contrast for large enlargements (at
    the 24mm-50mm focal length range) as my old Nikon 25-50mm/4 AIS which was in a
    class by itself? How do either of these two AF zooms compare in distortion at
    the wide end and flare w/ the older AIS lens?

    TIA

    Regards,

    Lewis

    Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

    [url]http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm[/url]

    Remove "nospam" to reply
    Lewis Lang Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: Nikon 24-120 VR

    >Subject: Re: Nikon 24-120 VR
    >From: "David Ruether" [email]rpn1no-junk.cornell.edu[/email]
    >Date: Wed, Jul 16, 2003 6:33 PM
    >Message-id: <bf45qp$373$1news01.cit.cornell.edu>
    >
    >
    >
    >"Lewis Lang" <contaxmanaol.comnospam> wrote in message
    news:20030715165356.00221.00000421mb-m03.aol.com...
    >
    >[...]
    >> Does anybody know if the current 24-120 "regular" Nikon zoom or the new
    >24-120
    >> VR is as excellent optically in sharpness/contrast for large enlargements
    >(at
    >> the 24mm-50mm focal length range) as my old Nikon 25-50mm/4 AIS which
    >was in a
    >> class by itself? How do either of these two AF zooms compare in distortion
    >at
    >> the wide end and flare w/ the older AIS lens?
    >> Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":
    >> [url]http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm[/url]
    >
    >My memory is dimming somewhat of the 25-50mm f4 Nikkor, but as I recall,
    >the performance at 25mm was about a stop behind that of the 24mm f2.8
    >(very good, but not outstanding) at 35mm, it was superb, at 50mm it was
    >even-to-the-corners-at-all-stops-but-not-exciting... Distortion was fairly
    >low
    >(as it is with the 24-120), and flare was OK (as it is with the 24-120).
    >The
    >24-120 non-VR (good sample) is surprisingly good at true f5.6 throughout,
    >and outstanding at f8 and f11 (amazing for a wide-range zoom that includes
    >WA). More is in the review at [url]www.ferrario.com/ruether/articles.html[/url] and
    >in the Nikkor list at [url]www.ferrario.com/ruether/slemn.html[/url] (ignore the hit
    >counter - it was recently reset...;-).
    >--
    > David Ruether
    > [email]rpn1cornell.edu[/email]
    > [url]http://www.ferrario.com/ruether[/url]
    > Hey, take a gander at [url]www.visitithaca.com[/url], too...!
    >
    Thanks a whole heap'n bunch for the info and the URL :-)

    Regards,

    Lewis

    Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

    [url]http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm[/url]

    Remove "nospam" to reply
    Lewis Lang Guest

Similar Threads

  1. BNE FS: Nikon F5 kit
    By eug k in forum Photography
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: September 22nd, 01:47 AM
  2. New Nikon SLR's to use Nikon high speed image sensor
    By deryck lant in forum Photography
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: July 26th, 07:13 PM
  3. [BNE] FS: Nikon F5 kit
    By Miro in forum Photography
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 24th, 01:44 PM
  4. Nikon D100/Nikon N80; same exposure?
    By Tom Thackrey in forum Photography
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: July 15th, 05:51 AM
  5. nikon F3 vs FA
    By zoldan in forum Photography
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 26th, 08:53 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139