Lens Confusion

Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
4,437
Location
Denver, Pennsylvania, uSA
I have been reading the reviews and opinions on these two Nikon lenses: 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF and the 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. I may be missing something, but I didn't see my questions answered. I believe that I have narrowed my next lens down to one of these guys. Aside from the VR advantage, will one of these lenses give a sharper image than the other? I want to use it as my main walk-around lens. I can see the advantage of 200mm for the birds at my feeders and I can see the advantage of lower shutter speeds while hand-held with the VR. I believe that the baby VR will focus faster as well. Aside from the $200 difference, is there any other difference? Is there anything else that you guys would recommend from Nikon or anyone else?

By the way, I will be using it on my D70 which is typically used in P mode and RAW+JPEG.

Thanks.
 
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
3,181
Location
Kendalia, TX
Greg,

I have the 24-120 VR and so far I like this lense. I feel like it is a nice all around lense. Of course, the extra reach would be nice also.

Here is a pic I took this evening of our hummingbirds with the VR lense.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
3,181
Location
Kendalia, TX
Me too!

I am printing this out and trying to digest this as well.

It is nice to know what a lense is capable of doing from a technical standpoint and from I think an objective point as well.

Paul,

Just curious, who does the testing? The manufacturers of the lenses? 3rd parties?

And is this info always available for lenses?

Ok I will go do a search right now!
 
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
3,181
Location
Kendalia, TX
Yep, I just found the Nikon site. I was trying to figure out how to read the Japanese but, you are right just enough english to kind of make sense of it. This is interesting stuff for sure. I never know about such things. But that is why I am here. To learn more.

Hopefully, this info helps Greg in making his lense decisions.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
574
Location
Escondido, California
How would you use the lens you decide to buy? I have both and have had good success with both of them...but I call the 28-200 G Nikon's best secret! At the long end it is amazingly sharp and at the wide end very acceptable. barrel distortion at the wide end...slight pincushion at the long...but not enough to bother in most cases.

I think this is an amazing travel lens. Here is a link to show a little about it. I put the photos together right after the lens was originally introduced.

http://www.pbase.com/paulfrye/nikkor_28200_g_testshots

I also like the 24-120 VR for certain instances...but that is a horse of another color. It would really help to know what you want to photograph.

Regards,

Paul

gbenic said:
I have been reading the reviews and opinions on these two Nikon lenses: 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF and the 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR. I may be missing something, but I didn't see my questions answered. I believe that I have narrowed my next lens down to one of these guys. Aside from the VR advantage, will one of these lenses give a sharper image than the other? I want to use it as my main walk-around lens. I can see the advantage of 200mm for the birds at my feeders and I can see the advantage of lower shutter speeds while hand-held with the VR. I believe that the baby VR will focus faster as well. Aside from the $200 difference, is there any other difference? Is there anything else that you guys would recommend from Nikon or anyone else?

By the way, I will be using it on my D70 which is typically used in P mode and RAW+JPEG.

Thanks.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
4,437
Location
Denver, Pennsylvania, uSA
papafoxtrot said:
How would you use the lens you decide to buy?
It would be my "all purpose" lens. I really like the kit lens but it doesn't have enough reach for me. When I use the 70-300 and set it for 100 or 135mm, that would suffice for 80% of my shots at the telephoto end. I figured if I could get a carry around lens, I could add a "birding" lens and a portrait lens later as funds free up.

I also keep looking at the Sigma 28-135/2.8-4. It looks promising. Since I am still a beginner with the MTF charts, I am not 100% certain, but I think that it should be comparable to my kit lens.

As far as the 28-200mm/3.5-5.6 ED is concerned, I don't know if enough light would be available at 200mm for me to comfortably hand hold a lower light shot. My 70-300 doesn't fair well for me in this regard and it has similar specs.

This is the chart for the Sigma. If I understand it at all, it appears to be a lens with good contrast and sharpness at the telephoto end and above average at the wide end.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Here is the chart for the kit lens (wide on left). It looks like it does better in the wide angle than telephoto. This is why I keep looking at the Sigma.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


But then again, I may still be really confused!

Thanks for reading!
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
574
Location
Escondido, California
Greg,

I think the 28-200 G lens is one of the best all-around lenses. As far as hand-held...all the fireworks shots and the football shot were taken hand-held. I think I ramped up to 400 ISo with the football shot. I was as far away in the stadium as you could get and yet, when I zoomed in I could easily read everyone's jerseys. It was taken at 200mm, too, with the D100 which was soon to be replaced by the D70.

MTF charts are nice...but what you really see with the lens is what counts. I found this lens to be very sharp in all its range. You lose some bokeh relative to an f/2.8 or f/1.4 lens, but that is also true of the 28-120 VR lens.

As mentioned, I like them both...but if I'm going traveling and can only take one lens it will be the 28-200 G. And please don't confuse it with the 28-200 D lens. That is older generation and no-where near the quality of the G lens.

Regards,

Paul
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
574
Location
Escondido, California
28-200 G knowledge...

Gale, you are going to make me blush. There is an awful lot of great talent in this forum...and you are no slouch, yourself. How did you do those kaleidoscopic photos, anyway?

Regards,

Paul

Gale said:
Wow Paul ,you sure a wonderful knowledge base for us here.

Thank you ...
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom