User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - Printable Version +- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com) +-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4) +--- Forum: Nikon (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=12) +--- Thread: User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR (/showthread.php?tid=1102) |
User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - JJ_SO - 09-07-2015 Most tests do not include VR / IS / VC /OS effect. As Klaus said, it's difficult to find a fair testing method. The only test I see is getting one and comparing with a well-known lens. What is easy to test: How well the lens recognize "I'm on tripod now", but I guess, that's close to impossible. The time is just too short to detect, decide and react. VR switched ON always means sort of attempting movement compensation. What I also observe is a massive side jump of the VR (Nikon) when I release the first shot. I'd need to recheck but I think the difference between finder view before and after shot is less big with Sigma. User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - stoppingdown - 09-07-2015 Quote:The only test I see is getting one and comparing with a well-known lens. I agree - and of course, I'd like to see tests on the field. User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - Guest - 09-11-2015 Errrm, and you believe this....hmmmm...."review"...? Really ? LOL! User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - Bojan Stepancic - 09-13-2015 Quote:Most tests do not include VR / IS / VC /OS effect. As Klaus said, it's difficult to find a fair testing method. The only test I see is getting one and comparing with a well-known lens.In my last test of Nikon 200-500 f5.6 i noticed that some photo with time around 1/1000s where probably afected from use of VR sistem. User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - JJ_SO - 09-13-2015 Not again :wacko: . This pesty VR stuff appears to be a tiny bit overrated. User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - Scythels - 09-14-2015 Quote:Yawn. A 5 digit price tag isn't very high compared to the costs of deep space exploration. Yes, we got it you're working in a lab, Airy-discus. Don't need to tell every time lab stories. However we don't get it that you're getting there a five digit salary per month ^_^ because then I could understand your diminishing attitude. Can I also apply of such a 5 digit job at Lensrental's? Just kidding.I am sorry if I offend - that is not my intention. The OLAF Lab is quite mundane compared to the lab I work in at college (though I made many more dollars at OLAF than I do as a student researcher ). As an example of a recent experiment, we are in the testing phases of an aberration-free telescope which we will use to study nodal aberration theory applied to nonrotationally symmetric surfaces by injecting aberrations into a "pure" system and studying the effects based on the injection location of the aberrations in the optical system. We have essentially put coma into a window plate and will add that to the system. To fabricate the plate we start with a $20 100mm diameter window of N-BK7 and make 7 deterministic polishing runs. Each requires pre and post metrology of the surface and takes approximately 14 hours. This is done on a Fizeau interferometer which costs $100,000 - $750,000 depending on the model and requires a highly trained technician. The deterministic polisher is somewhere in the low millions. When completed, the piece is worth $25,000 - $75,000 as quoted from a few freeform-capable manufactures simply due to the machinery and time needed. Freeform is essentially "super-aspheres," but an aspheric lens of that diameter would cost $250-$2500 depending on the maximum slope of the surface. Make it double-sided and the cost increases to more like $750-$7500. Reduce the diameter to 1/3 that, but ask for 2-3 of these in a system with 9 other elements, a mechanical barrel, coatings, some QC testing, warranty, etc, and you must sell it for $999. Tough price to meet. Look at the collimators used in an MTF bench for example. They have non-aggressive specs - 300mm f/6 and extremely limited FoV for example. The manufacture will ask $10,000 - $15,000 for one. Canon manages to produce a 300mm f/2.8 with a much wider FoV, adjustable focus, autofocus, an image stabilizer, and advanced mechanics for $6,000. To those making optics for research, defense, private industry, or biomedical applications that kind of aggressive pricing is unheard of. Photographers wonder why the lenses aren't finished in a fine gold leaf for that price, but you get an enormous value for your money. The fluorite elements in the 300/2.8 on their own are worth about half its price in raw materials alone ($750-$1000/lb) let alone the processing and manufacturing of the elements. User review of new Nikon 24-70 f2.8VR - Brightcolours - 09-14-2015 Quote:In my last test of Nikon 200-500 f5.6 i noticed that some photo with time around 1/1000s where probably afected from use of VR sistem.Yikes, Nikon seems to have an issue with their current image stabilization design, and their product testing. |