Well, things are getting more complicated the faster you make them.
So it'll be interesting whether they can keep the quality.
It'll be interesting to see how this compares to the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 Contemporary. A little bit less range vs a bit more customization - for those willing to spend some time with the USB-dock.
Fluorine coating, Nano crystal, electromagnetic diaphragm on Nikon side, minimal distance 22 cm on Sigma side and at half the price...
07-02-2015, 08:26 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-02-2015, 08:27 AM by Rover.)
Yeah, pretty similar construction overall (except the layout of the seven elements towards the rear). But fast APS-C zooms have always been pretty expensive, think the 17-55. The 24-120 didn't seem that great on the long end per Markus's review anyways.
At max. aperture it is slightly worse than the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6. However, I reckon that it is better at comparable apertures.
Do you plan to review the new Contemporary version of the already reviewed 17-70/2.8-4 macro OS some day or are the differences just too small to justify another test procedure? The optical quality appears to be close to the Nikkor 16-85