AF-S VR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G

[seanlim]

Is this lens as sharp as the 50mm(nikkor).....could some1 comment..thanks

 

[lenzz]

bro.. this has been discussed here many times... plse search.

 

[King Tiger]

Is this lens as sharp as the 50mm(nikkor).....could some1 comment..thanks

Hi seanlim

It's 2 different class.
One is a zoom lenes while the other is a prime lense.

For sharpness, both lense can give you the sharpness you want.
Alhough 50mm performance much better than 24-120 @ 50mm.

 

[espn]

http://forums.clubsnap.org/search.php


Do a search, there's a thread whereby Avatar (very helpful, humble, experienced Nikon moderator, unlike some other) have gave a lot of comments and feedback on this glass.

 

[seanlim]

yar..i did a search but only this site":
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=173671&highlight=AF-S+VR+24-120mm+f/3.5-5.6G
proved useful...anw any other comments abt this lens versus the 18-200vr?

 

[espn]

Here we go again...

 

[seanlim]

Here we go again...

aye...dun like that suan lei:cry:

 

[King Tiger]

Here we go again...

It's ok lah, be patience, my lord.

 

[King Tiger]

yar..i did a search but only this site":
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=173671&highlight=AF-S+VR+24-120mm+f/3.5-5.6G
proved useful...anw any other comments abt this lens versus the 18-200vr?

Care to tell us what is your concern, needs and wants ?

So that we can advise you more directly.

 

[wind30]

slrgear.com


there is reviews for BOTH lens. And the information there is far more detailed than any normal user feedback you will get here. + there is review for the 17-55mm so you know how far the lens is from the "best" DX zoom.

 

[roti_prata]

24-120 is no where near the 50 prime

 

[TMC]

50mm is nowhere near the 24-120. Both are different in its use.

 

[seanlim]

Care to tell us what is your concern, needs and wants ?

So that we can advise you more directly.

kk lets see...i have decided to get a couple of lens to suit my need:
AF-S VR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G or the 18-200 VR
24mm/2.8 or the 18-35mm or the 20mm
60mm/105mm macro...


but after using my prime, i realised that theres a big diff in terms of sharpness between it and my kit lens. so i want to have some comparison between the lenses

 

[roti_prata]

unless ur very demanding, the 18-200vr + 60marco r enuff for most of the time. reviews and tests hav shown the 18-200vr to be better thn xpected of a high magnification lens

 

[lsisaxon]

unless ur very demanding, the 18-200vr + 60marco r enuff for most of the time. reviews and tests hav shown the 18-200vr to be better thn xpected of a high magnification lens

I second that view. Even when I got the 18-200, I wasn't expecting the lens to perform that well especially when it's a 11x zoom.

 

[Dennis]

If you are not into film or FF than 18-200 is OK, both gives sharp images.
The 24-120 needs some getting used to especially the VR, the stabilizing time is longer.
18-200 is the overall champ now for superzoom unless you are using FF than the 24-120 would be good. Don't expect to compare to prime, it is not the same.

 

[Astin]

kk lets see...i have decided to get a couple of lens to suit my need:
AF-S VR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G or the 18-200 VR
24mm/2.8 or the 18-35mm or the 20mm
60mm/105mm macro...


but after using my prime, i realised that theres a big diff in terms of sharpness between it and my kit lens. so i want to have some comparison between the lenses

If u like the sharpness of the prime lens, then probably u should stick with prime lens.

 

[espn]

If u like the sharpness of the prime lens, then probably u should stick with prime lens.

I like prime's sharpness leh, but I don't like everything prime :bsmilie:

 

[seanlim]

I like prime's sharpness leh, but I don't like everything prime :bsmilie:

yea

 

[King Tiger]

I like prime's sharpness leh, but I don't like everything prime :bsmilie:

Nikon should design and build a "prime zoom" lense.:bsmilie: