Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/01/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 01:32:33 -0500

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/




Replies: Reply from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120)
In reply to: Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120)