NB23 advised me that the real strength of the 28-70/2.8 is at its wide end, and encouraged me to test it. But try as I could, I didn't have the strength to turn that ring all the way to 28mm, so I took my test shot at 32mm. {} Note: just kidding; the zoom ring is as smooth as butter . OK, looks good. Time to go back to the correct end of the zoom. My next victim was the trick little truck that picks up our clippings, shot at 70mm. View attachment 6796 The driver must have thought The Beast was a bazooka launcher, because his first reaction was to duck. Then he headed straight for me, and he looked pi$$ed. I thought he was going to run me down :? . View attachment 6797 But once he figured out it was just a camera, he was more than pleased to pose. View attachment 6798 I tried one more wide angle shot at Stix, when I bought lunch. Hey, I actually made it all the way to 28mm :twisted: ! View attachment 6799 Cool glass.
You poor thing. Nothing to do today except go out and play with your new toy.... 8) I have to admit (much as I hate to....;-)), these are pretty decent.... :lol: Frank
Bingo! This is my third iteration of a midrange zoom, Anand. The 24-120VR had great colors, but it wasn't sharp. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 was sharp, but didn't have great colors. The 28-70 has it all. I think I'm in love :wink:.
Every time I "listen" to you or look at your pictures it ends up costing me shedloads of cash. So I'm not even gonna look at this thread. No way. Nyet. But if Iwas tempted to take a peek, I bet your pictures would help prove what a great lens this is.
HI Frank, It looks like you love your beast. Did you have a chance to try some head shots with it yet? I was blown away by this lens. BillT.
The thing that's going to ruin you is your new 80-200AFS. I predict It will raise your standards for excellence, and you'll wind up with expensive glass throughout the range before you're satisfied. Better warn your wife .
I grabbed a few last nigh, Bill. Check out this thread. https://www.nikoncafe.com//forums/viewtopic.php?t=1868&highlight=
Hi Frank, Great shots. You mentioned in this thread that you figure out a solution to the bulk and weight of this lens. The size of this thing is indeed intimidating to carry it around. Can you share your solution? BillT
There's no way to reduce the weight of the lens, but it looks and feels a lot smaller without the lens hood. I'll only use it when necessary, or when I want to scare somebody :twisted:.
NOW I HEAR the 24-120 VR VR VR ISN"T SHARP....OH EEEEEKKKKK Tell me it ain't so....Pretty please :>))
Take a deep breath and calm down, Gale . If you're happy with the results from your 80-400VRVRVR, you'll be happy with the images from the 24-120VRVRVR. Neither of them is "critically sharp" in the same sense as the 17-55DX or the 70-200VRVRVR, but in good hands, like yours and Janet's, the 80-400VRVRVR has delivered brilliant images... and so will your new 24-120VRVRVR. 8)
Thanks for the compliment UF but my hands an photography falls far behind all of you. I started to late in life with this Hobby and I am not good at it al all. OK maybe, but not good. Just wish I was. Thats life. Oh found this from Moose peterson on the 24-120 But then he could shoot with anything and it would look priceless. Thank You appreciate your vote of confidence. http://www.moosepeterson.com/d2x/index.html (he is using the .....hummm...... D2 XXXXXXXXX)
HI Gale, The 24-120 VR is not sharp compared to the 28-70 f2.8 AFS or the 70-200VR. But if you can live with 80-400VR you should not have much problem with it. I used this lens mainly for travelling when I cannot bring too many lenses with me. In bright light conditions and not shooting it wide open, I got pretty good results (I normally print to 13x19) and the results are fine -- not great, but fine. In low light situations, the VR certainly helps a lot. Overall I think you will be satisfied with it. BillT.
