Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/10/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Maybe. I went back to the d1scussion list to have a look at who liked it, and most users who did so were either photojournalists or wedding photographers. IMHO It has a perfect range for street photography on a full frame body... Maybe you should swap the old 28mm f1.4 for the new 24mm f1.4? Cheers Jayanand On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com> wrote: > No, this was the 24-120 f3.5-5.6 VR AF-S. I didn't know it had been > redesigned. I got sent that one, the 3.5-5.6 on a review camera in > April. I have enough decent glass now that when I get Nikons for > review I ask them to send the camera without a lens. I didn't know it > had been redesigned, but the new glass gets released in Australia a > while, sometimes several months, after the rest of the world. > > One sad thing the D3x made me realise is that my much loved 28 1.4 > AF-D is showing its age. I always knew it wasn't as good as the > Summicron, but it was starting to look rather ragged wide open and > close up on the D3x. > > Marty > > > On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at > gmail.com> > wrote: > > Marty, > > Do you mean the one launched a short while ago that has just hit the > market? > > 24-120 f4? In the Nikon lists it is getting good reviews. > > Cheers > > Jayanand > > > > On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> The new 24-120 is just as bad as the first one. I don't know if it's > >> been redesigned optically, but it is cosmetically different and has > >> AF-S and VR. When I tested a Nikon D700 that was the lens that Nikon > >> sent with the camera. I thought something was wrong with the camera > >> until I tried it with some better glass. > >> > >> I agree on VR; it's great. It's just a shame that subject movement > >> makes it less useful for what I do, but a camera with built-in > >> anti-shake and good f1.4 lenses would be nice. > >> > >> Marty > >> > >> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >From what I know the 24-120 established a bad rep from day one but > was > >> > completely redone a few years later then completely redone again then > a > >> few > >> > years later completely redone again with VR. It could be ok by now > though > >> I > >> > like zooms which vear on the conservative side. But the 24-120 has VR. > >> > And VR is a not to be an underestimated game changer. > >> > > >> > Voucher Recharge > >> > Verification Requirement > >> > > >> > > >> > -------------------- > >> > Mark William Rabiner > >> > Photography > >> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > >> > mark at rabinergroup.com > >> > Cars: http://tinyurl.com/2f7ptxb > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> From: Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com> > >> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > >> >> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 12:19:10 +1030 > >> >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > >> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] D700 > >> >> > >> >> I don't like zooms. The 24-70 2.8 AF-S is decent. The 24-120 is the > >> >> worst; the real dog of the Nikkor range. > >> >> > >> >> Just about any wide range zoom is hopeless for architectural work. > >> >> > >> >> Marty > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Leica Users Group. > >> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Leica Users Group. > >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >