Nikon 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 D -???????

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by nyoung, Jan 3, 2007.

  1. nyoung

    nyoung Member

    Messages:
    371
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Bought one of these five years ago to shoot a wedding reception. It worked fine for that - all flash, indoors, 10-20 foot range, SB-28 on an F5. Since then, I've tried to use it in other applications - b&W landscape, street shooting etc. - and have been generally disappointed with the sharpness. Is there a trick - certain f stop - where it works available light or is it just a dog like the old 43-86?
     
  2. firecracker

    firecracker Member

    Messages:
    1,954
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Location:
    Japan
    Shooter:
    35mm
    It sounds like a dog. I think that kind of a convenient zoom lens is good at its widest or a mid-range somewhere with the F stops no greater than F5.6. Or if you know what perspective you want, like 24mm or 28mm, get a prime lens just for that.
     
  3. Eric Rose

    Eric Rose Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,421
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Location:
    Calgary AB,
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I've got one of these lenses and you could cut yourself it's so sharp. Very impressive zoom.
     
  4. Tom Hicks

    Tom Hicks Member

    Messages:
    50
    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    works best at f8 -f16. so so lens.

    tom
     
  5. PhotoJim

    PhotoJim Member

    Messages:
    2,223
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    Regina, SK,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    From all I've read (and what you see here is good evidence supporting it), this is a very variable-quality lens. Some samples are outstanding. Some suck. Some are in between.

    I have the 24-85/3.5-4.5 G (AF-S) and am very happy with it, if you're looking for an alternative. It's faster, but has a shorter zoom range.
     
  6. resummerfield

    resummerfield Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,360
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Location:
    Alaska
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have the Nikon 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 D, and the 28-200, and they both are soft. Real dogs!
     
  7. tony lockerbie

    tony lockerbie Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,363
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Location:
    Merimbula NSW Australia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Just found this thread so I can tell you my experiences with this lens. I traded my first one for the new Vr version and the first one I received was appaling. I sent it straight back to Nikon and duly received a new one.
    This one is fine, just don't use it at full aperture! Needs to be at F8 or smaller for best results, which are really good BTW. Also excellent is the flare control which is outstanding for a lens of this complexity.
    Seems to be a case of try before you buy with this lens, Nikon's QC seems to be slipping somewhat.
    All said and done, this is the perfect lens for wedding photography. Just keep a good prime for those wide aperture photos.
    Tony
     
  8. André E.C.

    André E.C. Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Location:
    Finland
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    The not so wide and not so long AF 28-105mm D, is a much better optic in every department, the levels of distortion and softness the 24-120 presents are unacceptable IMHO.

    Cheers

    André