[felix]

Just some suggestions for future tests

Since FX is finally becoming affordable, some of those film-era lenses are becoming way more interesting than they used to be.

I know it's super low priority compared to tests of lenses that can be bought new, but I think it would be nice if some were tested in the future - especially such that have a reputation for decent optical quality. 

 

Just some lenses that came to my mind... Most of them can be bought for very low prices, which makes them interesting for people (like me  ), who want to switch to FX without spending a fortune on zoom-lenses.

- AF 28-70/3.5-4.5 D (already tested on the D200)

- AF 28-85/3.3-5.6 G

- AF-S 24-85/3.5-4.5 G (non-VR) 

Judging from what is written online, all three of these may perform better/equal than the new 24-85mm. 

 

28-200G and 80-200/4.5-5.6 might also be interesting...

[Klaus]

Please don't tell Markus.

He is testing way too many old lenses anyway. :-)


Seriously - the reader interest is marginal for such tests.

[mst]

Nonetheless, some of the lenses may be reviewed... some day. I won't make any promises, though.

However, I seriously doubt that these oldtimers really perform better than the 24-85 VR.

-- Markus

[Rover]

Yeah, and the old 24-85 clearly showed that. Why waste review time on some even more obscure stuff when there's a fair chunk of current or semi-current glass to be tested, and a neverending stream of new products?

[felix]

@Klaus: oops!  :ph34r: 

 

@Markus: I'm glad you consider doing such tests some day, even though they seem not to generate a lot of clicks. I completely understand that other things come first and that you might not have the time to do them at all. Maybe I'll buy one or two of the above lenses and post sample images to "encourage" you 

 

As to outperforming the 24-85mm VR: You may very well be right, but I don't think that the bar is set very high.. The designs of the lenses mentioned above may be older, but most are also less "ambitious", so there should be some room for better optical quality. The 24-85/2.8-4.0 on the other hand is a somewhat more ambitious design compared to the new one. 

 

@Rover: Because some people enjoy reading tests of "obscure stuff"? I never said it should have priority over newer products... 

 

 

Update: just found DxO's new review of Nikon's 24-85/3.5-4.5 lenses - seems like the old one is pretty much on par performance-wise. It lacks the VR, though.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/...mera2)/485