Jay968 wrote:
Thanks. I'm very interested in this lens but don't want to jump till I am sure.
Sure of what? It's a winner. Don't let some internet randos convince you, pick it up and give it a spin.
atnpro wrote:
I got mine yesterday. Did some test shots. One thing that really amazes me is that its minimal focus distance simply blows both the F 70-200/4 and 70-200/2.8 out of water. It's about 1/3 of that of the 70-200/4 VR and only about 25% of that of the 2.8VRII. It's tack sharp across the board at wide open. When I get a chance. I'll post some of tests. In short, Nikon's delivered again.
I've been using the Sony 24-105 at 105/f4 for years for the same type of effect, and the Nikon version blows the Sony out of the water in terms of corner to corner sharpness wide open. Less vignetting too.
@RoamingScott wow, this seems like a solid step up from the 24-105 G. That just my impressions from these images, or does it seem to be your experience as well?
Nikon seems to be tightening its absolute death grip on the mid-range. Bit jealous .
I totally agree. This lens is a marked step up from the Sony variant.
JVan_02 wrote:
@RoamingScott@ wow, this seems like a solid step up from the 24-105 G. That just my impressions from these images, or does it seem to be your experience as well?
Nikon seems to be tightening its absolute death grip on the mid-range. Bit jealous .
When I bought the FX 24-120mm lens I took a series of shots of moss on a rocky wall at 24mm, 50mm, and 70mm zoom settings and then did the same with the 24-70mm lens. After comparing the shots from the two lenses I quickly sold the 24-120mm lens which had serious deficiencies in image sharpness.
With a good lens subjects have a 3 dimensional quality and with lesser lenses this effect is absent.
. 