[Papinead]

Good day to all,



I switched from Canon to Nikon and now I have the D300s. I bought an 18-200mm lens because everyone send it was a realy good lens for traveling. I find it too soft. I also purchased the 105mm F2.8 VR fixed lens. This is a great lens but it's not a zoom lens which I would need when I'm traveling. During the last month, I noticed a new lens that was produced. The Nikkor 24-120mm F4 G ED VR lens.



When can we expect an evaluation of this lens?



Thank you in advance.



Regards.



Denis.

[mst]

Welcome on board, Denis.



I'm already working on it. FX review will be out next week, DX a little later.



-- Markus

[Papinead]

Thank you very much.



Looking forward to the DX evaluation since I have a D300s Nikon.



Regards.



Denis.

[ricardsonwilliams]

I just saw the review..... I cannot belive this kind of lens get very bad score....





Optical Quality: 2stars

Mechanical Quality: 4starts

Price/Performance: 2starts

[mst]

[quote name='Ricardson Williams' timestamp='1293299471' post='5190']

I just saw the review..... I cannot belive this kind of lens get very bad score....





Optical Quality: 2stars

Mechanical Quality: 4starts

Price/Performance: 2starts

[/quote]



Allow me to correct:



Optical Quality: 2.5 stars

Mechanical Quality: 4.5 stars

Price/Performance: 2.5 stars



And, yes, hardly can believe it myself, certainly expected more from it <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



-- Markus

[Klaus]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1293307075' post='5192']

Allow me to correct:



Optical Quality: 2.5 stars

Mechanical Quality: 4.5 stars

Price/Performance: 2.5 stars



And, yes, hardly can believe it myself, certainly expected more from it <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



-- Markus

[/quote]



Actually, same price tag than the Canon 24-105L but a longer range. So technically there's no reason why it should performed any better or even match it.

Again another indication that the differences between the brands are actually very marginal despite all fanboyism which tries to suggest otherwise.

[ricardsonwilliams]

mst, thanks to correct me.



If this lens.... get score like this I can imagine how the 28-300 it will be..... please dont get me wrong guys.. I always use photozone reviews as reference.







regards,

Ricardson

[Guest]

Yeah, I cannot believe the score either. It's especially weird, on a D700 the NIkon 24-70 2.8 and 24-120mm f/4 are almost identical in sharpness to me both at f/4!



Did you knock off a half a point based one the vignetting and distortion over the Canon 24-105?

[mst]

[quote name='ben4345' timestamp='1293354214' post='5197']

Yeah, I cannot believe the score either. It's especially weird, on a D700 the NIkon 24-70 2.8 and 24-120mm f/4 are almost identical in sharpness to me both at f/4![/quote]



If you compare our reviews of both lenses, we don't really disagree <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



[quote name='ben4345' timestamp='1293354214' post='5197']

Did you knock off a half a point based one the vignetting and distortion over the Canon 24-105?

[/quote]



Distortion, vignetting and CAs, yes.



-- Markus

[mst]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1293314175' post='5193']

Actually, same price tag than the Canon 24-105L but a longer range. So technically there's no reason why it should performed any better or even match it.

[/quote]



Well, given it's slightly newer, hopes have been it would at least come very close.



-- Markus