Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sneak Preview: Nikon AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 VR
#1
http://photozone.smugmug.com/Reviews/afs2485vr



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#2
I was expecting this one after the old 24-85mm f/2.8-4D... But thanks anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />...



The distortion characteristics look like the older version.



85mm results look promising (the older lens @85mm looks soft even on my 12mp D700).



The bokeh is not so bad (for a zoom lens), but I'm not sure if it is better than the older lens. That old 24-85mm always surprises me considering the bokeh.



I guess hard to decide until we see the results of the older version...



Serkan
#3
The newer lens has higher priority, but I'm working on the 24-85/2.8-4 review, too. I'm also still looking for a used AF-S 24-85 (non-VR).



The 24-85 VR slightly disappointed me regarding distortion. I was honestly expecting a little better performance in this regard (see the samples below). However, with distortion correction now available in current Nikon DSLRs, this is probably no longer something Nikon cares too much about when designing their lenses. So, distortion is the new CA.



I have not measured it yet, but I have the impression that the 18-300 VR shows less (pincushion) distortion.



-- Markus



[Image: 2485dist1.jpg]



[Image: 2485dist2.jpg]
Editor
opticallimits.com

#4
Will the in-lens or in-camera software distortion-correction cause loose of resolution? I notice that all (?) Panasonic and Olympus lense correct distortion this way but I don't know if this is good or not. But on the other hand I don't know if the traditional optical distortion-correction in lens design has also some effects on resolution.



Frank
#5
Ouch. And yes, you probably lose a bit of AOV and resolution along the edges where the image is stretched. But still, if I ever switch to Nikon I'll probably be getting this lens as a standard. I'm using a Canon 24-85 (not stabilized, of course) currently.
#6
SLRGear has tested this lens (on D800 and D7000):

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.p...526/cat/13
#7
[quote name='Rover' timestamp='1344963108' post='19781']

SLRGear has tested this lens (on D800 and D7000):

[url="http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1526/cat/13"]http://slrgear.com/r...uct/1526/cat/13[/url]

[/quote]



Thanks for sharing... With regard to D800 review, it makes me wonder how come the 85mm and 70mm results could be better that the 50mm (@widest aperture setting). Isn't that odd...



Serkan
#8
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1345013452' post='19788']

Thanks for sharing... With regard to D800 review, it makes me wonder how come the 85mm and 70mm results could be better that the 50mm (@widest aperture setting). Isn't that odd...



Serkan

[/quote]

Who knows, maybe the lens was deliberately optimized to give up some ground in midrange and then rally again towards the max. focal length. Makes sense to me (if that's possible of course).

FWIW I wouldn't call the results at 70mm really better than those at 50mm.
#9
Reviewed at lenstip. Does not seem good.
#10
SLRGear results are so much better. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' /> Lenstip keeps getting weird and subpar results with lenses that are tested to be quite fine over here and on other sites (Tamron 24-70, Nikon 35/1.4, etc.) Odd.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)