Anyone ordering one?
24-85
(11 posts) (8 voices)-
Posted 11 months ago #
-
I am strangely tempted ... but I also want a new body this year and my personally owned glass is not on my upgrade schedule until next year... Oh well...
Posted 11 months ago # -
Don't think so. I'm waiting for the stars to allign to get a 24-70 f2.8.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I don't know enough yet to consider this. The bokeh looks nice on the pics though.
What I need to know in order to decide:1. The magnitude of contrast lost in contra-light situations. (I'm used to primes and Nano coating)
2. Accuracy of the AF mechanism. (kit lenses and the 16-85 are horrible in this aspect)
3. Just sharpness and more importantly micro contrast generally. (this is important, but not as much as the previous two)
I still think that the 24-120 F4 is amazing, for ppl wanting to get 24-70 quality for less money should be looking @ that and I'm fairly skeptic about this lens, there are some interesting things visible even on the Nikon sample images, but that could be user error.
4. build quality. (I hate it when a zoom pushes out a long chunk of plastic when zoomed in to the max setting)
Posted 11 months ago # -
Amazon had the MTF curve wrong apparently, as it showed near perfect sharpness. It looks plenty sharp, so yes, I will probably sell my Tokina 28-70/2.6-2.8 in favor of this one.
For the price, this is a STEAL! It will go to $799-899 in time and especially when supply is limited.
Does anyone have the 28/1.8?? That is one I am most curious about...
Posted 11 months ago # -
Maybe, waiting for test reviews to see if it offers any sharpness improvement over my 28-300. If not, the 24-120 may be my next purchase. The 24-85 is attractive because it would be light and covers a useful range with an aperture variation that is not significantly different than f4. I sure would like to get 23-120 level of sharpness in the new 24-85 at half the price, if possible. The MTF curves look promising, potentially better than the 24-120 f4. I am most interested in what DxOMark finds when these two lenses are mounted on a D800 or D800e.
It is my hope better image quality at higher and higher ISO will make those expensive f2.8 lenses unnecessary for most of us. It seems we can shoot at 3200 or 6400 or even 12800 ISO with the D800 and D4 with Noise reduction set to High depending upon your tolerances and preferences. If the next generation of Nikon cameras takes that up to 6,400, 12,800 and 25,600 lenses as slow as f3.5 to f4.5 will be very usable for most situation (except shallow DOF) for most of us most of the time.
Posted 11 months ago # -
donaldejose said:
Maybe, waiting for test reviews to see if it offers any sharpness improvement over my 28-300. If not, the 24-120 may be my next purchase. The 24-85 is attractive because it would be light and covers a useful range with an aperture variation that is not significantly different than f4. I sure would like to get 23-120 level of sharpness in the new 24-85 at half the price, if possible. The MTF curves look promising, potentially better than the 24-120 f4. I am most interested in what DxOMark finds when these two lenses are mounted on a D800 or D800e.It is my hope better image quality at higher and higher ISO will make those expensive f2.8 lenses unnecessary for most of us. It seems we can shoot at 3200 or 6400 or even 12800 ISO with the D800 and D4 with Noise reduction set to High depending upon your tolerances and preferences. If the next generation of Nikon cameras takes that up to 6,400, 12,800 and 25,600 lenses as slow as f3.5 to f4.5 will be very usable for most situation (except shallow DOF) for most of us most of the time.
Dxo etc measured resolution will be the same or better than the 24-120, but that's probably the least important thing, since even the kit lenses are really good when it comes to resolution only.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Gabbb: good point. I am not too concerned about build quality since I don't use lenses hard but I would be concerned about focus errors.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Unless the D400 is an amazing supper DX D4 and comes out soon, I'm probably picking up a D800 and this lens is tempting but I'll pick up a 24-120 instead. I have the older 24-85mm ED version that I will wait to sell to try but I'm fairly sure I will want the longer reach.
I do like they released it though. Good to see them resurrecting the good old FX glass that was easier on the pocket book.
I feel Dxo is a joke on lenses - it only tests how the sensor resolves for a lens not what the lens actually does. Tests on a lens, should never be dependent on the body of the camera. To actually test a lens, you need very expensive equipment. Dxo's sensor tests seem fairly good but a bit limiting on the defaults they choose to use, but there lens tests scores are dependent on the body, and are so close in "scoring" that are a joke in my mind.
Posted 11 months ago # -
It is a curious lens. I don't need it unless I were to go FX. If I get an FX body anytime I think I would really think about getting it, but as was mentioned why not the 24-120 F4 instead...I guess it depends on the money I had at the time.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Me too Warprints I am stuck right now with the 24-85mm AF lens and want to grab the 24-70mm 2.8 again very badly. Damn graduate studies has put a crimp in that plan so far though. Hopefully I'm looking at mid August or Early September for the fall season...
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
