Thinking of 24-120mm VR .......

andy9110 · 7th October 2004

i'm thinking of getting the 24-120mm VR lens anyone know whats the price range ?

chisiang · 7th October 2004

Buy! Buy! Buy!

I believe got quite a few for sales in the Buy & Sell section

http://forum.clubsnap.org/showthread...ghlight=24-120

Astin · 7th October 2004

For your convenience, you can go to the website of Nikon Singapore www.nikon.com.sg and see the list price of most Nikon products. The retail price should be (very roughly speaking) 20% off the list price.

King Tiger · 8th October 2004

Originally Posted by andy9110

i'm thinking of getting the 24-120mm VR lens anyone know whats the price range ?

Hi andy9110, I too was thinking of 24-120mm VR lens, about 1~2 weeks ago.
But drop the idea later after reading reviews and advise from fellow CS.

18-70mm DX still better.

espn · 8th October 2004

930 I believe.

bcoolboy · 8th October 2004

Originally Posted by andy9110

i'm thinking of getting the 24-120mm VR lens anyone know whats the price range ?

Try to do more research on this one. Many users are not satisfied with this lense though others are (with more people unsatisfied)! I personally don't know. I tried the lense once and I personally did not find anything so bad with it, I just did not find anything exceptional either considering the technology it had on it (AF-S VR). But then again that's me. Try it yourself.

If you DO go for it, some of my friends say you should buy a lens (AF-S 24-120 VR) with a serial number (SN) higher than 230000. "They say" that units rolled out with this SN or above should have fixed whatever was "wrong" (?) with the earlier versions. Don't know if its true but at least if you do so, you'll get one manufactured later (meaning newer). Though some again disagree with this notion saying that Nikon uses different SN's for different geographical locations which doesn't mean you'll be able to get a unit with that SN in say for example in SG.

For me, I'd say stick with the 18-70 DX kit lense and save up for the 70-200 VR! Yeah!

cheers,
bcoolboy

Godzilla Invades · 8th October 2004

Originally Posted by King Tiger

Hi andy9110, I too was thinking of 24-120mm VR lens, about 1~2 weeks ago.
But drop the idea later after reading reviews and advise from fellow CS.

18-70mm DX still better.

Sorry to let you down but I think 18-70 is an average lens. Look at the coating of the 18-70 then look at the 24-120. I took the liberty to test another budget high quality lens which is the 28-105.

Both 28-105 and 24-120VR sharpness and colours came out to be more natural. Some how the 18-70DX sharpness is there but the colours came out poor. Try and see it for yourself.

slacker123 · 8th October 2004

On a digital body. The 18-70 has a great field of view - wonderfully nice wideangle perspective all the way to short telephoto zoom (27.5-105mm). Its an excellent choice for almost any form of photography in good light.

The 24-120 VR has an equivalent view of 36-160mm. Frankly speaking, I would rather take that extra 8mm at the wide end over the 55mm at the telephoto end. Unless you need the VR for a good number of shots, the 18-70 is a very good choice.

I was last quoted 956 dollars at Cathay for the lens. A 600 dollar difference for an extra 55mm and a 5.6 f-stop? Nah, the 18-70 is definitely more worth it.

majere2sg · 8th October 2004

Both 18-70 and 24-120 are good walkaround lens. I think it all depends on what do you shoot usually. Don't forget that the 24-120 has an edge (VR) over the 18-70.

war3 · 8th October 2004

i am using this lense now. VR is really useful.
bought it this Jul in China, ard SG$810.

andy9110 · 9th October 2004

that cheap.. but do the lens have any world wide gurantee ?

mattlock · 23rd October 2004

hey I've got both lenses
the 24-120 vr is great for for VR function but the pictures I get from it are abit soft, as noted by alot of people online
also note the 24-120 lens is $@%$%$ HEAVY
(yes I'm one of those people who don't like to carry bricks around thank you.)
The new sigma lenses are pretty interesting, check them out
24-60mm f2.8 and 18-50mm f2.8
I've tried the 24-60mm and it's a pretty good lens, have yet to try the 18-50

Dennis · 23rd October 2004

Well, 24-120 have mixed feelings. It seems to me that this lens is not consistent. I sometimes get very sharp results but at times it is like out of focus ???. Can't duplicate the results. Most of the time it is OK. Did not test further as I seldom use this lens now a days. VR is great but it only compensates for its slow aperture. In general it is soft on the wide side but pretty Ok on the tele. Corners are acceptable on both. 18-70 seems to be better off. Sigma 18-125 will replace the 2 and is an interesting lens, mechanically all 3 are acceptable.

espn · 23rd October 2004

Originally Posted by mattlock

hey I've got both lenses
the 24-120 vr is great for for VR function but the pictures I get from it are abit soft, as noted by alot of people online
also note the 24-120 lens is $@%$%$ HEAVY
(yes I'm one of those people who don't like to carry bricks around thank you.)
The new sigma lenses are pretty interesting, check them out
24-60mm f2.8 and 18-50mm f2.8
I've tried the 24-60mm and it's a pretty good lens, have yet to try the 18-50

Heavy? Hehe.. try carrying a Nikkor AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 around,

Heehee. Anyway I used to have the 24-120VR. Superb len for the price and what it has to offer. VR is a good punch. 1/8s no problem. Slight tad softness wide, but on film is good, digital can alway USM

reachme2003 · 23rd October 2004

today, i met a friend who bought 24-120mm VR from CP today at $980.00.

sam_always · 23rd October 2004

it's good... but WA not enough le... better coupled with 12-24mm.... best for travelling liao....

espn · 24th October 2004

For travelling a WA is more than enough 12-24 or 17-35

I won't bring a 24-120VR on trip. Not 'wide' enough unless I'm shooting film. Heehee... the + factor of the 24-120VR is after FLM of 1.5X you get 36. Thereabouts film FOV. Heehee.

7th October 2004	#1
andy9110 Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 317	Thinking of 24-120mm VR ....... i'm thinking of getting the 24-120mm VR lens anyone know whats the price range ?

7th October 2004	#2
chisiang Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Ho Chi Minh City Posts: 1,238	Buy! Buy! Buy! I believe got quite a few for sales in the Buy & Sell section http://forum.clubsnap.org/showthread...ghlight=24-120 __________________ [/spending][/BBB][/FUN]

8th October 2004	#9
majere2sg Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Singapore (SengKang) Posts: 2,992	Both 18-70 and 24-120 are good walkaround lens. I think it all depends on what do you shoot usually. Don't forget that the 24-120 has an edge (VR) over the 18-70. __________________ -Express yourself not in words- Majere2sg's Digital Photography

7th October 2004	#3
Astin Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Astin Studio Posts: 4,735	For your convenience, you can go to the website of Nikon Singapore www.nikon.com.sg and see the list price of most Nikon products. The retail price should be (very roughly speaking) 20% off the list price.

8th October 2004	#5
espn Deregistered Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Planet Nikon Posts: 22,045	930 I believe.

8th October 2004	#8
slacker123 Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts Posts: 303	On a digital body. The 18-70 has a great field of view - wonderfully nice wideangle perspective all the way to short telephoto zoom (27.5-105mm). Its an excellent choice for almost any form of photography in good light. The 24-120 VR has an equivalent view of 36-160mm. Frankly speaking, I would rather take that extra 8mm at the wide end over the 55mm at the telephoto end. Unless you need the VR for a good number of shots, the 18-70 is a very good choice. I was last quoted 956 dollars at Cathay for the lens. A 600 dollar difference for an extra 55mm and a 5.6 f-stop? Nah, the 18-70 is definitely more worth it.

8th October 2004	#10
war3 Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 142	i am using this lense now. VR is really useful. bought it this Jul in China, ard SG$810.

9th October 2004	#11
andy9110 Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 317	that cheap.. but do the lens have any world wide gurantee ?

23rd October 2004	#12
mattlock Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,768	hey I've got both lenses the 24-120 vr is great for for VR function but the pictures I get from it are abit soft, as noted by alot of people online also note the 24-120 lens is $@%$%$ HEAVY (yes I'm one of those people who don't like to carry bricks around thank you.) The new sigma lenses are pretty interesting, check them out 24-60mm f2.8 and 18-50mm f2.8 I've tried the 24-60mm and it's a pretty good lens, have yet to try the 18-50

23rd October 2004	#13
Dennis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 3,864	Well, 24-120 have mixed feelings. It seems to me that this lens is not consistent. I sometimes get very sharp results but at times it is like out of focus ???. Can't duplicate the results. Most of the time it is OK. Did not test further as I seldom use this lens now a days. VR is great but it only compensates for its slow aperture. In general it is soft on the wide side but pretty Ok on the tele. Corners are acceptable on both. 18-70 seems to be better off. Sigma 18-125 will replace the 2 and is an interesting lens, mechanically all 3 are acceptable.

23rd October 2004	#15
reachme2003 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 3,575	today, i met a friend who bought 24-120mm VR from CP today at $980.00.

23rd October 2004	#16
sam_always Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 599	it's good... but WA not enough le... better coupled with 12-24mm.... best for travelling liao....

24th October 2004	#17
espn Deregistered Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Planet Nikon Posts: 22,045	For travelling a WA is more than enough 12-24 or 17-35 I won't bring a 24-120VR on trip. Not 'wide' enough unless I'm shooting film. Heehee... the + factor of the 24-120VR is after FLM of 1.5X you get 36. Thereabouts film FOV. Heehee.