Switch Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 to Nikon 24-120mm VR

[furball]

Considering switching back my lenses to Nikon lenses. Is the above switch advisable ?
I know the f stop is different for both lenses, but I'm hoping the VR in the Nikon lens would help, especially in indoor situation.

Any comments ?

 

[majere2sg]

VR can only helps to reduce camera shake and not stop actions, so unless you are taking indoor objects does not move much, I dun think VR will help much.. ;p

 

[espn]

I would say the two are vastly different in usage, one is a constant brighter glass which would aid indoor shoots.

However, the 24-120VR has the VR to compensate for that 2 stop less of light indoors as VR compensates 3 stops of shutter speed.

Your change doesn't seem to make a very much bigger vast difference to me in terms of what you intend to use it for, apart it's focal length.

28-75 vs 24-120VR, the 24-120VR has a wider to tele-reach, + VR which is good for ambient mood shots, as mentioned the VR makes up the loss of light 2.8->4->5.6.

It will really depend on your needs and why you intend to switch back. My comments are still as earlier, a replacement ideal would be the AF-S 17-55 f/2.8G DX or the AF-S 28-70 f/2.8.

Can check this thread for some feedback on the 24-120VR, it's a nice glass, slight softness at wide, but nothing USM can't help - http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=42184 - a very old thread with good advice from Avatar the moderator for N subforum. Might find it useful.

 

[furball]

Thanks for the link.

AF-S 17-55 f/2.8G DX or the AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 ... Hmm ... No moo-nee :sweat:

Not taking indoor sports, maybe help cover some events. Was hoping the VR can help catch some ambient light shots, cos I still got another lens (tamron 17-35mm, f2.8-4, to fall back on, I know ESPN is going to frown on this ...)

 

[Cheesecake]

Thanks for the link.

AF-S 17-55 f/2.8G DX or the AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 ... Hmm ... No moo-nee :sweat:

Not taking indoor sports, maybe help cover some events. Was hoping the VR can help catch some ambient light shots, cos I still got another lens (tamron 17-35mm, f2.8-4, to fall back on, I know ESPN is going to frown on this ...)

how about the Nikon AF24-85 f2.8-4D? very under-rated lens.

very good lens(sharp, good contrast, pretty fast AF even though its AF-D) at an affordable price in the used market. at most S$600/.:thumbsup:

 

[litefoot]

Considering switching back my lenses to Nikon lenses. Is the above switch advisable ?
I know the f stop is different for both lenses, but I'm hoping the VR in the Nikon lens would help, especially in indoor situation.

Any comments ?

Wide openning and VR is a different world. Addition is a more adequate word than switch because I see both of them working on different applications. If you find that the 2.8 is too huge and need a good single walkaround lens, this is a capable lens.

I was there in the queue for the 24-120 (non-VR) which was released more than 5 years ago. The wide end was the main attraction for me. Besides a slightly poor distortion control on the wide end, I find that this lens is slightly sharper on the tele for my sample. In terms of sharpness and constrast, it does meet my expectation compromising for the versatility. A few gripes for this lens. It zooms the other way (ie 24 on the left and 120 on the right), bad for users who are so familiar with other Nikkors. Front element rotates on zooming and protrudes out "offensively" on the tele. Other than this its a keeper for me.

The newer VR sports 2 ED elements. It seems to be the same as the non-VR but the size of the front and rear elements tells me that it isn't and at best a variant. Zoom direction as well as the rotation of the front element has been "put right". What is "put wrong" is the position of the focusing and zoom ring. Just need a little bit of getting used to like I was using the old lens on the zooming direction. Lens still protrudes out when zoomed. However, overall length on 24mm is longer but slightly shorter than the older lens at 120mm position. Did the ED help? So far, not noticeable according to my sample. So, to me the extra money you put in is for the speedy SWM and VR. The VR helps me to get sharp pix without support and that's about it.

You know what your 2.8 can do for you and I am telling you the 24-120 is a walkaround lens and not a replacement even with the VR. The older version can only be bought used. You take your pick.

 

[vincenthau]

I am thinking of switch my D70 kit lens to 24-120mm too.

I always find some of my pic are blur due to shake, or either I can't achieve required shutter speed under low light condition. I wonder if this len can help me or not??

I heard this 24-120 is very good for travel, I am thinking of this len for my travel, can use this lens for landscape and portrait too. But got review that from 25-50 f-length, the quality is soft......Any advice....... ??

 

[litefoot]

I am thinking of switch my D70 kit lens to 24-120mm too.

I always find some of my pic are blur due to shake, or either I can't achieve required shutter speed under low light condition. I wonder if this len can help me or not??

I heard this 24-120 is very good for travel, I am thinking of this len for my travel, can use this lens for landscape and portrait too. But got review that from 25-50 f-length, the quality is soft......Any advice....... ??

Sharpness is mostly relativity. My 24mm prime is obviously sharper. By my standard, for a flexible lens this lens is great. It stays reasonably sharp from f/8-11. It would be near perfect if the distortion control is better which I realised Nikon did not do much in the newer VR version.

VR helps but the fundamentals of getting a sharp pix is still important. For a simple reason, not all lenses are VR except KM.

 

[vincenthau]

Sharpness is mostly relativity. My 24mm prime is obviously sharper. By my standard, for a flexible lens this lens is great. It stays reasonably sharp from f/8-11. It would be near perfect if the distortion control is better which I realised Nikon did not do much in the newer VR version.

VR helps but the fundamentals of getting a sharp pix is still important. For a simple reason, not all lenses are VR except KM.

i need VR for my shaky hands sometimes, and sometimes after a long day of shooting it gets worse. haha.

 

[Artosoft]

i need VR for my shaky hands sometimes, and sometimes after a long day of shooting it gets worse. haha.

My VR is Tripod :angel:

Arto.

 

[vincenthau]

My VR is Tripod :angel:

Arto.

i like to use tripod too. but sometimes I like to take portrait of people. Prefer to take them as natural as possible, without tripod...haha..... too bad my shaky hands always blur the result.

 

[TMC]

then you need to work on your technique. and exercise your arms more.

 

[vincenthau]

then you need to work on your technique. and exercise your arms more.

will do so... sometimes I just got too excited.....haha

 

[TMC]

will do so... sometimes I just got too excited.....haha

sigh..........rookie :bsmilie:



joking

 

[damienster]

I just strike 4D and want to upgrade my lens. I am thinking of changing my 3mth old 24-120vr lens to at 28-70 2.8f lens. I already had the 12-24 tokina and 50mm 1.8. thinking if 17-55mm 2.8 but since i've a wide angle lens, i dont really need another.

no doubt that the vr kicks in in helping ALOT with my hand shake and 3stops faster. can hand held at 1/15s also. but the reason i'm changing is cos i feel that 2.8f is better than the vr function when at nite. vr works on u (due to ur handshake)but not on the moving subject. cos i'm taking mostly on events. advice pls....

if i shd change or keep my vr lens. if must change, how much is the 28-70mm 2.8f lens in the market and 2nd hand. thanks!!!

 

[damienster]

I am thinking of switch my D70 kit lens to 24-120mm too.

I always find some of my pic are blur due to shake, or either I can't achieve required shutter speed under low light condition. I wonder if this len can help me or not??

I heard this 24-120 is very good for travel, I am thinking of this len for my travel, can use this lens for landscape and portrait too. But got review that from 25-50 f-length, the quality is soft......Any advice....... ??

err... my vr lens work perfectly well for me!! think it's those serial no less than 221*** than got problem. think nikon noes about the feedback ppl gave and work on it liao. mine's 3****** series so no problem with it!!

 

[espn]

I just strike 4D and want to upgrade my lens. I am thinking of changing my 3mth old 24-120vr lens to at 28-70 2.8f lens. I already had the 12-24 tokina and 50mm 1.8. thinking if 17-55mm 2.8 but since i've a wide angle lens, i dont really need another.

no doubt that the vr kicks in in helping ALOT with my hand shake and 3stops faster. can hand held at 1/15s also. but the reason i'm changing is cos i feel that 2.8f is better than the vr function when at nite. vr works on u (due to ur handshake)but not on the moving subject. cos i'm taking mostly on events. advice pls....

if i shd change or keep my vr lens. if must change, how much is the 28-70mm 2.8f lens in the market and 2nd hand. thanks!!!

Thought you already jumped to canon? Still using Nikkor ah? Strike 4D somemore... Wow. :thumbsup:

f/2.8 + VR does work better than just f/2.8. VR and apertures are on different usages. Even with f/2.8 I would wish for VR. As again, taking events requires no hard fast rule. It depends on your style and what you want to capture.

 

[damienster]

Thought you already jumped to canon? Still using Nikkor ah? Strike 4D somemore... Wow. :thumbsup:

f/2.8 + VR does work better than just f/2.8. VR and apertures are on different usages. Even with f/2.8 I would wish for VR. As again, taking events requires no hard fast rule. It depends on your style and what you want to capture.

Huhhhhh??? since when i mentioned i jump to canon. must to loyal to 1 wife mah:bsmilie: ok thanks for the advice and hope to see more suggestions b4 spending my 4D $$:bsmilie:

 

[nikonsiao]

furball, buy a nikon..save all unneccesary trouble and time. get to enjoy pics somemore..
either the 28-70 or the 17-55 will be the choice.... :bsmilie:

good luck and keep us updated of your buy...

 

[Bernard Ong]

Thanks for the link.

AF-S 17-55 f/2.8G DX or the AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 ... Hmm ... No moo-nee :sweat:

Not taking indoor sports, maybe help cover some events. Was hoping the VR can help catch some ambient light shots, cos I still got another lens (tamron 17-35mm, f2.8-4, to fall back on, I know ESPN is going to frown on this ...)

I have the AFS 24-85mm. If you want, can lend you try try. Let me know.