Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/01/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:17:56 -0800
References: <CD24C61C.40CE%mark@rabinergroup.com> <4A63DD7B-65E4-4710-8A3F-B254BF73393F@sfr.fr>

On Jan 23, 2013, at 4:28 AM, philippe.amard <philippe.amard at sfr.fr> wrote:

> Le 23 janv. 13 ? 04:41, Mark Rabiner a ?crit :
> 
>> Philippe Amard posted a shot he did with I think current 24-120 with I
>> forgot which body on the lug in our last a few months ago heated 
>> discussion
>> of the focal length range in Nikon. He shot it at 120 and then he said
>> cropped a bunch. It was clear as a bell and had an airplane flying over
>> head. There was a water. I think a boat.... Impressed the hell outa most
>> everybody here and pretty much ended the thread with the idea that the 
>> lens
>> actually does more than produce a viable image.
>> 
>> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> I presume this is the one shot you're refering to (thanks for remembering 
> it BTW)
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/Barcelona+2009_001/Surfin_+Barcelona-1297.jpg.html
> 
> As to the crop and processing, here is the previous frame on the roll, FF 
> and unedited, straight from the tank.
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/Playground/Out+in+the+Wild-1296.jpg.html
> (click large to see what the obvious limits of the lens are, notably micro 
> contrast)
> 
> Sometimes it looks sharp,
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/Les+Gens/Enigma-5496-2.jpg.html
> but the bokeh and distortion are so-so as with every nikon lens I've seen 
> through...
> 
> Oly ZD glass performed much better in all respects; it was just the sensor 
> that triggered my drifting back to nikon.
> 
> Morals: I own the lousiest of all 24-120's but I won't complain as it was 
> gifted with the D700, and I use it for its convenient range and weight.
> 
> OTT Alice and I should be NYC third week of Feb, so on top of meeting us 
> if it pleases you, I could lend the lens to you for a live test.



drop by Sacramento too please,



Steve




> 
> Amiti?s
> Philippe
> 
> 
> 
>> On 1/22/13 3:13 PM, "Scott Gregory" <scottgregory at mac.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Have a look at the January photo in the 2013 Nikon calendar. Ed 
>>> Masterson took
>>> it on a D3 with 24-120 Nikkor. An exquisite shot!  I have the first 
>>> version
>>> that everybody says is awful and you cannot paint them all with the same
>>> brush. I used it last night on my d700 and shots were very sharp. No 
>>> issues at
>>> all.
>> Scott
>> 
>> On 2013-01-22, at 10:46 AM, Aram Langhans <leica_r8 at hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Well, then, let me clarify.  The lens I have is 15 months old and is
>>> the AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR  with nano coating and mystical 
>>> genies in
>>> it that must be asleep most of the time.  And it was sent back to Nikon 
>>> about
>>> 4 months ago for a look to see if they could make it actually work.  
>>> Came back
>>> saying it was up to specs, so I guess it is the best they can make it.  
>>> I paid
>>> $600 or so for my Leica 35/70 F/4 and $1300 for this think Nikon calls a 
>>> G
>>> lens.  G does not stand for "Good".
>>> 
>>> Aram
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original
>>> Message----- From: Mark Rabiner
>>> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 8:49 PM
>>> To:
>>> Leica Users Group
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120
>>> 
>>> It just that
>>> lens lens has existed in as many configurations as there are
>>> days in the
>>> week and it makes a big difference if people are specific as to
>>> which one
>>> they are referring to  because they one they came out the
>>> following year was
>>> the difference between day and night and the one which
>>> came out a  year
>>> after that ditto.
>>> 
>>> The 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 VR which came out in 2003 is a
>>> famous looser. Way
>>> soft all over.
>>> As to me and many people 2003 feels like
>>> the day before yesterday you could
>>> easily have this lens and think you were
>>> shooting with the current issue.
>>> And you can see it sold as if its new now
>>> for $669.99 .  Used from $340.0.
>>> And  refurbished from $475.00 on Amazon.
>>> (cue Tarzan)
>>> people think they are still made. Maybe they are.
>>> And there
>>> were countless versions before this.
>>> 
>>> The current offering is the AF-S
>>> NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR lens.
>>> Sometimes referred to as (the G lens)
>>> A
>>> totally re designed optic from the ground up and guess what? Nikon got 
>>> it>
>>> more than right this time.
>>> This lens came out  22nd September 2010 and has
>>> nano nano crystal coating.
>>> This version cost $1,299.95 according to this
>>> thing:
>>> 
>>> http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2193/AF-S-NI
>>> 
>>> KKOR-24-120mm-f%252F4G-ED-VR.html
>>> Or
>>> http://tinyurl.com/az7ev3x
>>> 
>>> So
>>> when people say "my Nikon 24-120 was good/bad" its rather meaningless.
>>> Its
>>> like saying "My meal in little Italy was good/bad" you have to say which
>>> 
>>> restaurant and what time of the day it was. And what you ordered.
>>> And what
>>> the wait persons name was.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 1/21/13 10:52 PM,
>>> "Aram Langhans" <leica_r8 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Here are a few things I
>>> don't like about mine.
>>>> 
>>>> It is not well made. There is a lot of play in
>>> the lens barrel, especially
>>>> when zoomed out a bit.  When it focuses, you
>>> can see the image jump around
>>>> in the viewfinder. Just very sloppy.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> If you focus on something at a certain focal length, then zoom in or 
>>> out,>>
>>> the focus shifts.  It is not really what I would call a zoom, but rather
>>>> 
>>> some variable focus lens from the 70's.  Makes it just about impossible 
>>> to
>>>> 
>>> use for night photography.  Nothing to focus on, so either prefocus in
>>>> 
>>> daylight at infinity, or use live view to focus on a bright star, but 
>>> the>>
>>> every time you recompose by zooming, you need to refocus.
>>>> 
>>>> The zoom
>>> creeps very easily, so makes the above even harder if you tried to
>>>> prefocus
>>> at a specific focal length, as it can change so easily.
>>>> 
>>>> At times I bet
>>> some very sharp photos, but most of the time I let it sit in
>>>> the camera bag
>>> and use the Leica 35-70/4 unless I need autofocus or focal
>>>> length greater
>>> than about 90mm, because I can easily crop the Leica to get a
>>>> sharper photo
>>> than the Nikon at 120
>>>> 
>>>> And this lens is suppose to be gold banded and
>>> much better than the original
>>>> 24-120.
>>>> 
>>>> I sent mine back to Nikon to
>>> have it tightened up and it came back just
>>>> about the same.
>>>> 
>>>> Aram
>>>> 
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Howard Ritter
>>>> Sent: Friday, January
>>> 18, 2013 7:37 PM
>>>> To: Leica Users Group
>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] (Now) Nikon
>>> 24-120
>>>> 
>>>> Jayanand?
>>>> 
>>>> May I ask what you didn't like about that new
>>> 24-120?
>>>> Other than the size, weight, and being less sharp toward the
>>> corners at all
>>>> focal lengths than the new (non-gold-banded) 24-85?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> ?howard
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:22 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj
>>> <jayanand at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I generally check out all lenses for at
>>> least a couple of hours of use
>>>>> before I buy - the only one I bought on
>>> impulse recently, without testing,
>>>>> the Nikon 24-120 f4 ended up being
>>> resold in a couple of months. There is
>>>>> a
>>>>> lesson there...(-:
>>>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>>>> Jayanand
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:02 AM,
>>> philippe.amard
>>>>> <philippe.amard at sfr.fr>wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The last two lenses
>>> I bought came from local  street shops, Phalsbourg &
>>>>>> Metz :-)
>>>>>> And
>>> the last 2 cameras from the local FNAC.
>>>>>> I find it so frustrating when you
>>> can't manipulate the gear prior to
>>>>>> punching the PIN code
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>> Amiti?s
>>>>>> Philippe
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Le 17 janv. 13 ? 17:58, Jean-Michel Mertz a
>>> ?crit :
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I've read most of the
>>> posts concerning ebay and its potential dangers. I
>>>>>>> think I might have an
>>> idea. I have been using one single lens (the
>>>>>>> collapsible elmar 50) for a
>>> number of weeks now (+ M8)  and I have come
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> the conclusion that
>>> this pair covers most of my needs. I do have another
>>>>>>> lens (sum 35 asph)
>>> but I seldom use it. I think this is probably
>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>> many other
>>> luggers experience, this successful match between a photog, a
>>>>>>> body and a
>>> lens which often results in wonderful pictures being made.
>>>>>>> See
>>>>>>> the
>>> use HCB made of his IIIg + 50mm. So, do we really need to have that
>>>>>>> many
>>> lenses and cameras since we all have our favourite gear? (I'm of
>>>>>>> course
>>> not talking of professional photogs!)Just an idea to beat ebay
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> 
>>> perhaps favour our local dealer - once every five years, for used and
>>>>>>> 
>>> less
>>>>>>> expensive gear!Jean-Michel
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>>> Leica Users
>>> Group.
>>>>>>> See
>>>>>>> 
>>> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailma
>>>> 
>>>>>> n/listinfo/lug>for
>>>>>>> more information
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> One sees clearly only
>>> with the heart. What is essential is invisible to
>>>>>> the eye. Antoine de
>>> Saint Exup?ry in Le Petit Prince.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>>>> 
>>> See
>>>>>> 
>>> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<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
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Mark William Rabiner
>>> Photography
>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Mark William Rabiner
>> Photography
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> One sees clearly only with the heart. What is essential is invisible to 
> the eye. Antoine de Saint Exup?ry in Le Petit Prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120)
Message from philippe.amard at sfr.fr (philippe.amard) ([Leica] (Now) Nikon 24-120)