[quote name='mst' timestamp='1352943797' post='20957']
Not bad, but not really something to get excited about:
Well, it's Ok for the price I'd say. The pricing does not allow any wonders anyway.
Thanks for the review Marcus...
Lots of distortion, vignetting, CA and moderate resolution results... What is improved compared to the older one? VR and a few aspherical elements (and not to forget the better price)... Actually, I personally think that the 1:2 magnification ratio of the old lens @35mm will definitely justify the "no-go"...
This puts the higher price of the announced Canon EF 24-70mm f4 L IS USM into perspective again... I would have expected this Nikon to be quite a bit better, though. The low corner resolution and rather high CA do surprise me.
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1352978126' post='20972']
I think both D600 and D800 have very high quality outputs. I suspect that this lens could match the potential IQ level. Yes the price earns an applause, but most of the D600/D800 owners could pay 200$ more for a better performance.
I personally believe that the strong point of this lens is that the long end reaches 85mm. But other than the FL, it does not look ok to me (at least on paper).
I really wonder why they don't introduce a 35-85mm f/2.8 lens... Wouldn't that be a nice fit (as an alternative to 24-70mm)?
A 35-70mm f2.8 lens will not be a lot less expensive than a 24-70mm.... And standard zooms that only had 35mm as widest setting fell out of grace in the 1980's. From there it went from 28mm and then to 24mm. I doubt a 35-70mm lens would be very popular...