Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been? (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t747399-how-many-nikon-24-120mms-have-their-been.html)

RichA 04-26-2011 07:13 PM

How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
I figure at least four up to the new f4.0 unit. Never well-regarded,
but the new one did allow Nikon to almost double the price from the
last one from about $700 to $1200.

PeterN 04-26-2011 11:02 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
On 4/26/2011 3:13 PM, RichA wrote:
> I figure at least four up to the new f4.0 unit. Never well-regarded,
> but the new one did allow Nikon to almost double the price from the
> last one from about $700 to $1200.


Don't buy one.

--
Peter

Bowser 04-27-2011 12:09 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
I shot with the very first one years ago, and it was a very nice lens. Very sharp up to 90mm, and very good after that. No IS though, but I really liked that lens.


"RichA" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message news:05901462-7a39-4b06-889b-8673486adb39@k5g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
I figure at least four up to the new f4.0 unit. Never well-regarded,
but the new one did allow Nikon to almost double the price from the
last one from about $700 to $1200.

Michael Benveniste 04-27-2011 01:25 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
"RichA" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:

> I figure at least four up to the new f4.0 unit. Never well-regarded,
> but the new one did allow Nikon to almost double the price from the
> last one from about $700 to $1200.


It's good to see that in this Internet backwater, the standards of
accuracy and research remain at their historical levels. I
haven't been able to find more than three versions released
publicly, but I look forward to learning about the other versions
you know about.

As for "never well-regarded," that's pretty much true, especially
among people who never tried one. You may hear a different story
from a real photojournalist, tourist, or other photographer who
realizes a) the MTF and SQF of a missed shot are exactly zero,
and b) you shouldn't try to pretend a Swiss Army Knife is the
same thing as a K-Bar Army Knife.

All lenses are engineering compromises, and cost plays a part in
almost all of the tradeoffs. The f/3.5~5.6 versions traded off
some optical quality for savings in size, weight, and yes, cost.
The newer f/4 version chooses different tradeoffs at a different
price.

--
Mike Benveniste -- mhb@murkyether.com (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain




Rich 04-27-2011 02:30 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
On Apr 27, 9:25*am, "Michael Benveniste" <m...@murkyether.com> wrote:
> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I figure at least four up to the new f4.0 unit. *Never well-regarded,
> > but the new one did allow Nikon to almost double the price from the
> > last one from about $700 to $1200.

>
> It's good to see that in this Internet backwater, the standards of
> accuracy and research remain at their historical levels. *I
> haven't been able to find more than three versions released
> publicly, but I look forward to learning about the other versions
> you know about.
>
> As for "never well-regarded," that's pretty much true, especially
> among people who never tried one. *You may hear a different story
> from a real photojournalist, tourist, or other photographer who
> realizes a) the MTF and SQF of a missed shot are exactly zero,
> and b) you shouldn't try to pretend a Swiss Army Knife is the
> same thing as a K-Bar Army Knife.


I tried one on the D300. The 16-85 wipes the floor with it.

Doug McDonald 04-27-2011 02:42 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
On 4/27/2011 9:30 AM, Rich wrote:
> On Apr 27, 9:25 am, "Michael Benveniste"<m...@murkyether.com> wrote:
>> "RichA"<rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I figure at least four up to the new f4.0 unit. Never well-regarded,
>>> but the new one did allow Nikon to almost double the price from the
>>> last one from about $700 to $1200.

>>


>
> I tried one on the D300. The 16-85 wipes the floor with it.


REALLY?

How well does the 16-85 work at 105mm?? Do a direct comparison.

I own Canon, not Nikon, but I own a Canon 24-105 f/4L lens.
Its a good lens, but at the top of its range the much cheaper
70-300 I own is much better. Over some of its range the
extremely cheap (as in flimsy and low cost) 17-55 kit lens
is equally good (but lacks IS). This in on crop frame.

But neither 70-300 nor 17-55 is a good general lens.
The 24-105 is.

Doug McDonald

Michael Benveniste 04-27-2011 03:34 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
"Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:

> I tried one on the D300. The 16-85 wipes the floor with it.


Please feel free to post comparison shots along with the
reference to those other "special" versions of the 24-120mm
I've never heard of.

I'll wait with baited breath, assuming, of course, that I
have sashimi for dinner.

--
Mike Benveniste -- mhb@murkyether.com (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain



Rich 04-27-2011 05:57 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
On Apr 27, 11:34*am, "Michael Benveniste" <m...@murkyether.com> wrote:
> "Rich" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I tried one on the D300. *The 16-85 wipes the floor with it.

>
> Please feel free to post comparison shots along with the
> reference to those other "special" versions of the 24-120mm
> I've never heard of.
>


"Special?" In what sense? They had D, ED, ED VR and the new f4.0
across the board.


Michael Benveniste 04-27-2011 07:31 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
"Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Special?" In what sense? They had D, ED, ED VR and the new f4.0
> across the board.


The non-VR ED version would be "special," because if it ever
existed it was never released publicly. Nor is it listed in
the Archive section of the Nikon Imaging website.

I eagerly await your evidence of same as well as your
comparison photos.

--
Mike Benveniste -- mhb@murkyether.com (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain






PeterN 04-27-2011 10:32 PM

Re: How many Nikon 24-120mm's have their been?
 
On 4/27/2011 3:31 PM, Michael Benveniste wrote:
> "Rich"<rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Special?" In what sense? They had D, ED, ED VR and the new f4.0
>> across the board.

>
> The non-VR ED version would be "special," because if it ever
> existed it was never released publicly. Nor is it listed in
> the Archive section of the Nikon Imaging website.
>
> I eagerly await your evidence of same as well as your
> comparison photos.
>


My bated breath wait will smell baited, long before that happens.


--
Peter


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.