Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/01/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Found what? Nobodies saying WHEN they owned the lens and we're not seeing any images. Nobody has given a hint on this lens they used a ways back when that was! Nobody has clearly defined theirs as a G f4. Its a lens they used a while back and didn't like. That's why I did my post. The last time we talked about this it was not that many months ago and most people admitted when they checked they had the previous disastrous version. Now all of a sudden every one had bought and sold a lens which came out the day before yesterday. Where's the pix its as if Lightroom had not been invented yet or Bridge? I have a database by the way which tells me what date I got each lens I ever got its serial number what I paid for it where I got it from and what its mothers maiden name was. Also I can do a search in my Bridge in effect database and see how many pix I took with it an when and make a quick jpeg of one to show for myself. The F4 G lens came out 2 years and 4 months ago. Bought and sold and all evidence lost. Not buying it. On 1/22/13 1:38 AM, "John McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote: > You must get different emails to me, by my count: > > 1 person asked > 1 person found it OK on a couple of shots > 1 person tried several examples to get an OK copy > 4 people have owned and do not have much good to say about > A few insults between contributors... > > Everybody calls it the current and/or f4 version looking at my emails > > John > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: lug-bounces+john=mcmaster.co.nz at leica-users.org [mailto:lug- >> bounces+john=mcmaster.co.nz at leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Mark Rabiner >> Sent: Tuesday, 22 January 2013 7:33 p.m. >> To: Leica Users Group >> Subject: Re: [Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120 >> >> Yea no it hasn't been made clear at all. >> >> >> On 1/21/13 11:52 PM, "John McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote: >> >>> Everybody in this thread has been talking about the current f4 >>> version, and with experience of it. This has come up before with the >>> same answers/comments.... >>> >>> john >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> >>>> It just that lens lens has existed in as many configurations as there >>>> are days in the week and it makes a big difference if people are >>>> specific as to which one they are referring to because they one they >>>> came out the following year was the difference between day and night >>>> and the one which came out a year after that ditto. >>>> >>>> The 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 VR which came out in 2003 is a famous looser. >>>> Way soft all over. >>>> As to me and many people 2003 feels like the day before yesterday you >>>> could easily have this lens and think you were shooting with the >>>> current issue. >>>> And you can see it sold as if its new now for $669.99 . Used from >>>> $340.0. >>>> And refurbished from $475.00 on Amazon. (cue Tarzan) people think >>>> they are still made. Maybe they are. >>>> And there were countless versions before this. >>>> >>>> The current offering is the AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR lens. >>>> Sometimes referred to as (the G lens) A totally re designed optic >>>> from the ground up and guess what? Nikon got it more than right this >>>> time. >>>> This lens came out 22nd September 2010 and has nano nano crystal >> coating. >>>> This version cost $1,299.95 according to this thing: >>>> http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera- >>>> Lenses/2193/AF-S-NI >>>> KKOR-24-120mm-f%252F4G-ED-VR.html >>>> Or >>>> http://tinyurl.com/az7ev3x >>>> >>>> So when people say "my Nikon 24-120 was good/bad" its rather >> meaningless. >>>> Its like saying "My meal in little Italy was good/bad" you have to >>>> say which restaurant and what time of the day it was. And what you >> ordered. >>>> And what the wait persons name was. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/21/13 10:52 PM, "Aram Langhans" <leica_r8 at hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Here are a few things I don't like about mine. >>>>> >>>>> It is not well made. There is a lot of play in the lens barrel, >>>>> especially when zoomed out a bit. When it focuses, you can see the >>>>> image jump around in the viewfinder. Just very sloppy. >>>>> >>>>> If you focus on something at a certain focal length, then zoom in or >>>>> out, the focus shifts. It is not really what I would call a zoom, >>>>> but rather some variable focus lens from the 70's. Makes it just >>>>> about impossible to use for night photography. Nothing to focus on, >>>>> so either prefocus in daylight at infinity, or use live view to >>>>> focus on a bright star, but the every time you recompose by zooming, >>>>> you need to >>>> refocus. >>>>> >>>>> The zoom creeps very easily, so makes the above even harder if you >>>>> tried to prefocus at a specific focal length, as it can change so >>>>> easily. >>>>> >>>>> At times I bet some very sharp photos, but most of the time I let it >>>>> sit in the camera bag and use the Leica 35-70/4 unless I need >>>>> autofocus or focal length greater than about 90mm, because I can >>>>> easily crop the Leica to get a sharper photo than the Nikon at 120 >>>>> >>>>> And this lens is suppose to be gold banded and much better than the >>>>> original 24-120. >>>>> >>>>> I sent mine back to Nikon to have it tightened up and it came back >>>>> just about the same. >>>>> >>>>> Aram >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Howard Ritter >>>>> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 7:37 PM >>>>> To: Leica Users Group >>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120 >>>>> >>>>> Jayanand< >>>>> >>>>> May I ask what you didn't like about that new 24-120? >>>>> Other than the size, weight, and being less sharp toward the corners >>>>> at all focal lengths than the new (non-gold-banded) 24-85? >>>>> >>>>> <howard >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:22 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj >>>>> <jayanand at gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I generally check out all lenses for at least a couple of hours of >>>>>> use before I buy - the only one I bought on impulse recently, >>>>>> without testing, the Nikon 24-120 f4 ended up being resold in a >>>>>> couple of months. There is a lesson there...(-: >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> Jayanand >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mark William Rabiner >> Photography >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Mail was checked for spam by the Freeware Edition of CleanMail. >> The Freeware Edition is free for personal and non-commercial use. >> You can remove this notice by purchasing a full license! > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/