Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This thread is clearly Nikon and OT ;-) Unlike another recent one.... john ________________________________________ This is probably not the time or place, but I really like my 21/2.8 Kobalux LTM. Great for those available light landscapes when all you have is your Leica IIIf (trying to get back on Leica here...when I want to know about Nikon, I can check out Ken "PayPal" Rockwell). Sent from my iJeff Jeffery L. Smith New Orleans, Louisiana USA On Jul 9, 2012, at 18:51, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > This guy, DOUGLAS DIETIKER for landscapes tested it out and couldn't figure > out what all the fuss was about it worked for him perfectly. > http://theuntamedlandscape.blogspot.com/2010/11/nikon-24-120-review-for-land > scape.html or > http://tinyurl.com/7p56ako > Its a rather involved test. He uses the lens now and carries around less > glass on a shoot as a result. > > - - from my iRabs. > Mark Rabiner > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > >> From: Aram Langhans <leica_r8 at hotmail.com> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:05:23 -0700 >> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikon forum advice (OT!) >> >> I have been using the 24-120/4 for about 11 months now. I can't say I am >> thrilled with the results, though I like the reach. I was experiencing >> some >> mechanical problems with the lens. If I grabbed the front ring and >> wobbled >> it, there was a lot of play and it did not improve it I racked the lens in >> to the 24mm position. And while walking around, the lens developed quite >> a >> bit of creep from when I first got it. I sent it to Nikon for a look. I >> also had them look at the focus, because it does not behave like any Zoom >> lens I have ever had. If I am in focus at 24mm, and I zoom out to some >> other focal length, the focus shifts. And vice versa. It was terribly >> frustrating in Yosemite a few months ago when shooting the moonbow at >> midnight. I could never get the focus correct, so I slapped on the Leica >> 35-70, set it to infinity, and the day was saved, albeit at a shorter >> focal >> length. >> >> I sent the lens back to Nikon and just got it back a few weeks ago. They >> said everything was just fine. No problems. The must have lubed it a >> bit, >> as the lens barrel does not wobble or creep as much as it did. I suspect >> that will return as I break it in again. It still focus shifts >> dramatically >> when you zoom in or out. I guess it is designed that way. An old >> variable >> focus design in a new lens. >> >> As far as image quality, it is OK, but not what I would expect from a >> $1200 >> lens. Been spoiled by my 35-70/4 Leica R zoom. that lens is a very nice >> lens. Of course, it is a 2x zoom vs a 5x zoom, so I would expect it to be >> better. But it also is in focus at whatever the focusing ring says, and >> if >> you zoom in and out the focus does not change. A true, high quality zoom. >> >> Aram >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Frank Dernie" <Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com> >> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 11:08 AM >> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikon forum advice (OT!) >> >>> I understand the new f4 version of the 24-120 is no better quality than >>> its predecessor the f3.5-f5.6 which you dislike so much, though I have >>> not >>> tried one myself (I was put off by so many disappointed owners posting on >>> the 'net). How many really disappointing pictures did you take with your >>> f3.5-f5.6 before coming to the conclusion it was rubbish? >>> I -know- that half-wit Rockwell slags it off, but most of what he writes >>> is a load of old tosh, so that means nothing to me. >>> Frank D >>> >>> On 9 Jul, 2012, at 08:31, Mark Rabiner wrote: >>> >>>> I think more pros well use the 24-85 but plenty will use the 24-120. >>>> Depending on their needs. >>>> If they need a more conservative better corrected optic they'll get that >>>> one. >>>> If they are just shooting people and like the range they'll get the >>>> 24-120. >>>> I wont know till the time comes but I like 600 bucks for a better >>>> corrected >>>> lens better than 1300 for a less corrected. >>>> The former is just out and I'd forgotten about it. >>>> >>>> I will say one thing >>>> I'd gotten quite used to using a 24-85 on a D200 DX body and I liked the >>>> reach. Now that I'm using it on a full frame D700 I'm no longer getting >>>> that >>>> reach. The 24-120 gives it back to me. Plus on the wide side two more >>>> focal >>>> lenghs. That sound real good to me. But not the weight and the bulk. And >>>> the >>>> price. >>>> I'd like to try one in hand first. See if it likes me. Which one. >>>> >>>> - - from my iRabs. >>>> Mark Rabiner >>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information ------------------------------------------------------------ Mail was checked for spam by the Freeware Edition of CleanMail. The Freeware Edition is free for personal and non-commercial use. You can remove this notice by purchasing a full license!