Professional Web Applications Themes

the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D - Photography

"erzar" <com> wrote:   In my opinion, they are both unimpressive. The earlier 24-85mm f/2.8-4 suffered from unsharp images wide open with a lot of barrel distortion and light fall-off at the 24mm setting. The maximum aperture of the latest G lens appears to have been reduced in order to make the optical weaknesses less obvious. Better choices include the previous 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D Nikkor and either version of the 24-120mm AF Nikkor which is a very good performer between 24mm and 85mm. The earlier version is less good from 85mm to 120mm, but the new version is said by ...

  1. #1

    Default Re: the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D

    "erzar" <com> wrote:
     


    In my opinion, they are both unimpressive. The earlier 24-85mm
    f/2.8-4 suffered from unsharp images wide open with a lot of barrel
    distortion and light fall-off at the 24mm setting. The maximum
    aperture of the latest G lens appears to have been reduced in order to
    make the optical weaknesses less obvious.

    Better choices include the previous 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D Nikkor and
    either version of the 24-120mm AF Nikkor which is a very good
    performer between 24mm and 85mm. The earlier version is less good
    from 85mm to 120mm, but the new version is said by Nikon to be much
    improved.


    T Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D

    >Subject: Re: the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D 
    >
    >
    >In my opinion, they are both unimpressive. The earlier 24-85mm
    >f/2.8-4 suffered from unsharp images wide open with a lot of barrel
    >distortion and light fall-off at the 24mm setting. The maximum
    >aperture of the latest G lens appears to have been reduced in order to
    >make the optical weaknesses less obvious.
    >
    >Better choices include the previous 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-D Nikkor and
    >either version of the 24-120mm AF Nikkor which is a very good
    >performer between 24mm and 85mm. The earlier version is less good
    >from 85mm to 120mm, but the new version is said by Nikon to be much
    >improved.[/ref]

    Hi Tony:

    Are you referring to the new version w/ VR to be much improved or the previous
    non-VR new version of this lens (assuming there are two different versions of
    the 24-120 before they made a VR version). I've seen the (highly magnified)
    results of someone's VR (newest) 24-120 (I don't have the URL handy but I
    believe it was recently posted on this newsgroup) which had barely passable (to
    me anyways) sharpness wide open at 3.5 but nice and crisp by f/8 which I guess
    makes it good for general purpose work (especially so because of its zoom range
    and VR facility) but maybe not the kind of lens I'd want for quality
    large16x20" prints wide open. This is based on web/scanned examples and large
    actual prints may be another story entirely, but, just based on web
    observations (which is all I can for the moment) it would seem to me that this
    lens, though quite good, is not in the same league as the 25-50mm AIS I used to
    own which was really good wide open or there abouts and super sharp stopped
    down, nor as good as my current 24-50mm Maxxum zoom (same basic comments as
    Nikon 25-50mm AIS). I was hoping for a miracle lens (in quality) ;-) w/ the
    bonus of VR and its longer range. Its the wide open (aperture) quality that I
    could really use, almost any lens stopped down to f/8 is decent if not
    excellent (w/ rare exceptions), VR is nice but wide open performance w/ VR
    would have been even nicer...

    Lewis

    Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

    http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

    Remove "nospam" to reply
    Lewis Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D

    comnospam (Lewis Lang) wrote: 

    Yes.
     


    Neither of the 24-120mm designs are especially good wide open. What
    should we expect of a very wide angle to telephoto 5X zoom?

    Since posting about the Nikon designers' viewpoint I have since seen a
    discussion thread about the 24-120mm VR lens on dpreview.com which
    strongly suggested some severe QC problems with early production
    lenses. The problem appears to be that the left and right sides of
    the shot may not be simultaneously in focus ...

    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=5631460

    (Hint: it's worth reading the whole thread)

    As so often, it appears that realising designers' aspirations on the
    production line is not as easy as would seem. Surely Nikon cannot
    afford another VR débacle like the 80-400mm VR? What is the value of
    the fast, quiet AF-S "Silent Wave Motor" if it quickly and
    unhesitatingly gives you an out-of-focus shot?

    :-(



    T Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D

    T P wrote: 
    >
    > In my opinion, they are both unimpressive. The earlier 24-85mm
    > f/2.8-4 suffered from unsharp images wide open with a lot of barrel
    > distortion and light fall-off at the 24mm setting. The maximum[/ref]

    Actually mine has pincushion distortion in 85mm setting and is
    quite neutral in 24mm. Light fall off is a fact: You better use
    slim filters with this lens or a diameter converter and 77mm filter.

    *Most definitely* I do not see any loss of sharpness on the wide side.

    This practitioner report: http://www.jimtardio.com/24-85.html
    describes nicely this very compact and fast focussing lens. Its
    macro abilities are very good and since the focussing ring turns
    only 20-25 degree, it focusses damn fast.

    Thomas

     
    ThomasH Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D

    Im thinking of getting this lens but am tossing up between it and the g
    version. Have you treid that one?
    "ThomasH" <net> wrote in message
    news:net... 
    > >
    > > In my opinion, they are both unimpressive. The earlier 24-85mm
    > > f/2.8-4 suffered from unsharp images wide open with a lot of barrel
    > > distortion and light fall-off at the 24mm setting. The maximum[/ref]
    >
    > Actually mine has pincushion distortion in 85mm setting and is
    > quite neutral in 24mm. Light fall off is a fact: You better use
    > slim filters with this lens or a diameter converter and 77mm filter.
    >
    > *Most definitely* I do not see any loss of sharpness on the wide side.
    >
    > This practitioner report: http://www.jimtardio.com/24-85.html
    > describes nicely this very compact and fast focussing lens. Its
    > macro abilities are very good and since the focussing ring turns
    > only 20-25 degree, it focusses damn fast.
    >
    > Thomas
    >
    > [/ref]


    erzar Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: the nikon 24-85mm G vrs the 24=85mm D

    comnospam (Lewis Lang) wrote: 

    Yes, that's it! <g>
     

    I couldn't possibly comment on the cause ... but imagine the chagrin
    of a photographer who bought this lens for that particular "feature",
    and found that the "swing" was the wrong way round!

    I suppose he/she could use the camera upside down ... !!

    ;-)

    T Guest

Similar Threads

  1. 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
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 19th, 06:04 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