Anyone using the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED?

Sk8te · 4th December 2004

I am thinking of buying some walk around glass and thought that the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED might be what I need... anyone here using it?

shmott · 4th December 2004

It's a wonderful walk around/travelling lense. But if you are on 1.5 crop factor, then the 24 might not be wide enuff. There are mix reviews of this lens. From my own experience and preference, I like the color produced from this lense. Sharpness wise is less than desired. But if you are looking for a walk around lens, i think the sigma 18-125 is a better option as its cheaper, optics wise i think they should be on par.

p.s. I might sell mine soon.. :P

breakaway · 4th December 2004

i own a sigma 50mm marco and the auto focusing is NOISY and SLOW. Anyone face this problem with the 18-125mm?

espn · 4th December 2004

Originally Posted by shmott

It's a wonderful walk around/travelling lense. But if you are on 1.5 crop factor, then the 24 might not be wide enuff. There are mix reviews of this lens. From my own experience and preference, I like the color produced from this lense. Sharpness wise is less than desired. But if you are looking for a walk around lens, i think the sigma 18-125 is a better option as its cheaper, optics wise i think they should be on par.

p.s. I might sell mine soon.. :P

I'll concur otherwise, after FLM it's exactly the best len to use for walkaround, 24 = 36FOV. Just nice.

Had it, sold it, I needed something else.

bernardsia · 4th December 2004

Originally Posted by Sk8te

I am thinking of buying some walk around glass and thought that the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED might be what I need... anyone here using it?

For a very long time I've wanted to buy this lense. But everytime I want to get it and read a review. I decide not to.

sam_always · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by Sk8te

I am thinking of buying some walk around glass and thought that the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED might be what I need... anyone here using it?

how about tamron sp 24-135... heard that it's a very sharp lens and a good walkaround lens

kajun_liu · 5th December 2004

24-120 VR...

great color n contrast.
But not a very sharp lens.

Sk8te · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by bernardsia

For a very long time I've wanted to buy this lense. But everytime I want to get it and read a review. I decide not to.

yah same here man... been reading very mixed reviews about this lens... one thing I read is that it is rumoured that the soft problems with this lens is with the eariler batches of this lens... the newer ones are actually damn good... but it might just me speculation.... the pictures taken are also not very concistent...but the good reviews are also a plenty... very confused...

Originally Posted by kajun_liu

24-120 VR...

great color n contrast.
But not a very sharp lens.

Hmmm how old is your lens? Can test test on my D70??

5th December 2004

It's a good walkaround lens and the sharpness issue can all but be corrected with the correct application of USM. I find the 28-105 macro lens to be a lot sharper, sometimes too sharp for portraits where you can see every pore! It's great for still life work though.

So, the 24-120VR lens? It's good to have when I want an all-round lens with a bit of VR for low light. Doesn't compare to 70-200VR!!

rtbh · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by Sk8te

I am thinking of buying some walk around glass and thought that the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED might be what I need... anyone here using it?

I'm using this lens on my D70. Overall quite happy with it's range and it's VR, find it useful in low light situation. Not good in giving comments, you can take a look at my photos to see for yourself. It's a good walkabout lens, if it's what you're looking for, in terms of it's range, weight and size. I got this lens because of it's AFS and VR, and priced below 1K, and unless I have better budget.

arampan · 5th December 2004

I'm using the lens. It is a good events coverage lens. The VR option helps to shoot more quickly. I can run to position, look and shoot.

Works well in crowded conditions too when too many people around you to get a stance.

It is not piercing sharp so it's good to shoot people with.

chisiang · 5th December 2004

sk8te: My opinion, I guess you already know

Anyway, There are reviews stating that this lense sharpness is lousy at the corners, f/3.5 not fast enough.

But, when use with a D70, the soft corners will be cropped so not much of a concern. In fact, even my Nikon AFS 17-35 only have a 50% rate of getting good sharpness! Shoot burst and select the sharpest!

f/3.5-5.6 will be compensated by the VR anyway!

I can't really find another good alternative for this range except for the brick - Nikon 28-70. But the price of the 28-70 is way off. And at a fraction of the price of the the 28-70, you get to cover quite a bit.

A lot of lense reviews focus too much on lense performance and fails to weigh the cost aspect of lense.

The 24-120 VR is a very good lense to buy when considering cost effectiveness.

BUY! BUY! BUY! I know a few guys are selling in the market place.

Sk8te · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by chisiang

sk8te: My opinion, I guess you already know

Anyway, There are reviews stating that this lense sharpness is lousy at the corners, f/3.5 not fast enough.

But, when use with a D70, the soft corners will be cropped so not much of a concern. In fact, even my Nikon AFS 17-35 only have a 50% rate of getting good sharpness! Shoot burst and select the sharpest!

f/3.5-5.6 will be compensated by the VR anyway!

I can't really find another good alternative for this range except for the brick - Nikon 28-70. But the price of the 28-70 is way off. And at a fraction of the price of the the 28-70, you get to cover quite a bit.

A lot of lense reviews focus too much on lense performance and fails to weigh the cost aspect of lense.

The 24-120 VR is a very good lense to buy when considering cost effectiveness.

BUY! BUY! BUY! I know a few guys are selling in the market place.

Haha was wondering when you will give your 5 cents worth... I have been crawling D70 forums and see mixed reviews man... think I just wanna test it on my camera and see the results for myself first....

So any 24-120 owners kind enough to let me test test??

Sk8te · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by Phildate

It's a good walkaround lens and the sharpness issue can all but be corrected with the correct application of USM. I find the 28-105 macro lens to be a lot sharper, sometimes too sharp for portraits where you can see every pore! It's great for still life work though.

So, the 24-120VR lens? It's good to have when I want an all-round lens with a bit of VR for low light. Doesn't compare to 70-200VR!!

Yah I will eventually get the 70-200VR, played with it, LOVE IT!! freaking sharp and colour saturation is just nice out of the camera(in my eyes), but I need a new walk around lens first, for general purpose, the kit lens really cannot make it in my opinion, I am shooting with my 50mm 80% of the time and I need a good general purpose lens...

5th December 2004

Quote:

So any 24-120 owners kind enough to let me test test??

I'll lend it to you for a test drive - PM me

espn · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by chisiang

-snip

In fact, even my Nikon AFS 17-35 only have a 50% rate of getting good sharpness! Shoot burst and select the sharpest!

-snip-

*cough cough* you sure it's not a len problem? When I was using my friend's, I had no problems with sharp images on slides/digital body even at f/2.8.

Sk8te · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by espn

*cough cough* you sure it's not a len problem? When I was using my friend's, I had no problems with sharp images on slides/digital body even at f/2.8.

Hmmmm some one kenna suan here... haha

espn · 5th December 2004

Originally Posted by Sk8te

Hmmmm some one kenna suan here... haha

Nope Sk8te, I'm not suaning him, but just want to make sure that the len he has is not faulty or anything, because I've used my friend's 17-35 before I know what it can deliver and what he mentioned doesn't seem very normal to the various copies I've tested from my friends.

chisiang · 5th December 2004

Dunno leh... maybe always handshake. But then sometimes on tripod also not sharp enough. Guess it's not the lense but the focusing algorithm of the D70. Some1 lend me a D2x to test pls

tky · 5th December 2004

I've been thinking abt replacing my kit lens with this as well. Thanks for sharing rtbh.

Btw - I just realize the pbase images look better if you select original vs. large. I thot the lens was a little soft until I decide to click on the "original" size.

Originally Posted by rtbh

I'm using this lens on my D70. Overall quite happy with it's range and it's VR, find it useful in low light situation. Not good in giving comments, you can take a look at my photos to see for yourself. It's a good walkabout lens, if it's what you're looking for, in terms of it's range, weight and size. I got this lens because of it's AFS and VR, and priced below 1K, and unless I have better budget.

4th December 2004	#1
Sk8te Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 303	Anyone using the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED? I am thinking of buying some walk around glass and thought that the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED might be what I need... anyone here using it?

5th December 2004	#7
kajun_liu Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Tanjungpinang, Bintan island Posts: 345	24-120 VR... great color n contrast. But not a very sharp lens. Last edited by kajun_liu; 5th December 2004 at 02:58 AM.

5th December 2004	#12
chisiang Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Ho Chi Minh City Posts: 1,238	sk8te: My opinion, I guess you already know Anyway, There are reviews stating that this lense sharpness is lousy at the corners, f/3.5 not fast enough. But, when use with a D70, the soft corners will be cropped so not much of a concern. In fact, even my Nikon AFS 17-35 only have a 50% rate of getting good sharpness! Shoot burst and select the sharpest! f/3.5-5.6 will be compensated by the VR anyway! I can't really find another good alternative for this range except for the brick - Nikon 28-70. But the price of the 28-70 is way off. And at a fraction of the price of the the 28-70, you get to cover quite a bit. A lot of lense reviews focus too much on lense performance and fails to weigh the cost aspect of lense. The 24-120 VR is a very good lense to buy when considering cost effectiveness. BUY! BUY! BUY! I know a few guys are selling in the market place. __________________ [/spending][/BBB][/FUN]

5th December 2004	#19
chisiang Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Ho Chi Minh City Posts: 1,238	Dunno leh... maybe always handshake. But then sometimes on tripod also not sharp enough. Guess it's not the lense but the focusing algorithm of the D70. Some1 lend me a D2x to test pls __________________ [/spending][/BBB][/FUN]

4th December 2004	#2
shmott Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Sin jia por lor... Posts: 531	It's a wonderful walk around/travelling lense. But if you are on 1.5 crop factor, then the 24 might not be wide enuff. There are mix reviews of this lens. From my own experience and preference, I like the color produced from this lense. Sharpness wise is less than desired. But if you are looking for a walk around lens, i think the sigma 18-125 is a better option as its cheaper, optics wise i think they should be on par. p.s. I might sell mine soon.. :P

4th December 2004	#3
breakaway Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,121	i own a sigma 50mm marco and the auto focusing is NOISY and SLOW. Anyone face this problem with the 18-125mm?

5th December 2004	#9
Phildate Guests Posts: n/a	It's a good walkaround lens and the sharpness issue can all but be corrected with the correct application of USM. I find the 28-105 macro lens to be a lot sharper, sometimes too sharp for portraits where you can see every pore! It's great for still life work though. So, the 24-120VR lens? It's good to have when I want an all-round lens with a bit of VR for low light. Doesn't compare to 70-200VR!!

5th December 2004	#11
arampan Account Suspended Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Jurong West Posts: 141	I'm using the lens. It is a good events coverage lens. The VR option helps to shoot more quickly. I can run to position, look and shoot. Works well in crowded conditions too when too many people around you to get a stance. It is not piercing sharp so it's good to shoot people with.