Nikkor 24-120MM F3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Lens VERSUS the 70-200 MM F 2.8 G ED-IF AF-s VR Zoom Le

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Old Man River, Mar 25, 2006.

  1. Hello, Not trying to start a war.

    I currently have the D-70S and the Kit Lens. In addition I have the
    80-400MM Zoom VR lens. It's ok, and I took some great pictures with it. I
    want something in the middle, or I will get rid of the 80-400 and use the
    70-200 Instead.

    Was wondering if anyone has and uses the 24-220 lens mentioned above? I
    want to purchase a Diopter to use if for macro photography and based on the
    review at http://www.naturfotograf.com he does not think it's as good a lens
    as the 70-200 VR.

    I am asking for your personal experiences and how you have used the lens
    (24-120) what issues you have had to overcome and what you did.

    The lens sells for around 510.00 US at D and H. Looked on e-bay and could
    not find one there.

    My girlfriend uses the 24-85 F2,8-4D IF AF Zoom, and that is just a great
    piece of glass. Takes excellent pictures. Suppose I could duplicate that
    lens and use the 70-200 for the long stuff.

    The 24-85 has a macro setting. However, John and Barbara Gerlach, mentioned
    in one of their classes that if you have a good 200MM lens, making it into a
    macro lens is easier with a diopter, so trying to kill two birds with one
    stone. A dedicated macro lens is just that, and I want some flexibility.

    Thank you in advance for taking the time to at least read this.

    And no, I am not going to change brands and go to Cannon, and no I don't
    care about Full Frame sensor now. I need to improve in my photography first
    and the better equipment will come later. The D200 is nice, but way more
    camera than I can use. Plus I want to see how it evolves down the road for
    a year or so first. Thom Hogan and Dpreview reviews are good, but there are
    enough small things I don't want to spend the money now.

    Sincerely,

    Old Man River
     
    Old Man River, Mar 25, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Old Man River

    Guns/Zen4 Guest

    I have the 24-120 and covet the 70-200 f/2.8.

    The 24-120 is surprisingly sharp sometimes:
    http://faczen.smugmug.com/gallery/1248085/1/58516768/Large
    http://faczen.smugmug.com/gallery/1248332/1/58523017/Large

    It's amazing what you can do with the VR (handheld)
    http://faczen.smugmug.com/gallery/1248711/2/60720529/Large
    http://faczen.smugmug.com/gallery/1248711/1/58541162/Large

    That said, I've heard of people complaining that they've gotten a soft
    one

    Glenn
    Photo gallery at http://faczen.smugmug.com
    Reply via the web portal at www.faczen.com
    or email usenet at faczen dot ca
     
    Guns/Zen4, Mar 25, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Old Man River

    Paul Furman Guest

    Old Man River wrote:
    24-120MM F3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Lens VERSUS the
    70-200 MM F 2.8 G ED-IF AF-s VR Zoom Lens
    They are very different ranges & different quality. I'm not sure if the
    24-120 would be better than the kit lens in it's range, it's not as wide
    & slower f/stop. Certainly the 70-200 would be better than the 80-400 in
    it's range.
    A dedicated macro is more flexible as it can focus to infinity also. A
    'diopter' setup is akward, only working within a few feet range and some
    compromise in image quality. I've got a 70-200 VR with a screw-on +2
    diopter closeup lens and it is nice but inconvenient. The only good one
    available for the 70-200 is a 2-element Canon & it is not cheap. It is
    akward to use, I need to keep screwing it on & off for different
    conditions. But it is nifty to have 200mm stabilized macro!

    The 70-200 VR is big & heavy.
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 25, 2006
    #3
  4. Thank you for the information. I think based on some additional research,
    that I am going to purchase the 70-200 sell my girlfriend the 80-400 for her
    N80 and (she will also buy the D70S later when I move up) and down the road
    a piece will purchase the same lens she has for my camera. It has the macro
    feature but much better appture at 2.8. I don't like the kit lens, but it's
    got good glass, it's just does not have the macro feature. I am going to
    set up a humming bird feeder and try to take pictures of them so will need
    the macro part.

    Old Man River.
     
    Old Man River, Mar 26, 2006
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.