Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 18, 2005, 7:42 AM   #1
Junior Member
pokeeemon's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3

hey guys, i want to buy a everyday lens for my D70 for general use. I couldn't decide on which on of these lenses i should buy.

28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF

24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G VR AF-S

What do you guys know about these lenses, or any other suggestions?

pokeeemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 18, 2005, 8:15 AM   #2
Senior Member
jimbojetset's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 189

My dad's had the 24-120 VR for about a week now, and it seems a good lens... VR is very nice, as I'm never that keen on using flash and his camera (d2h) doesnt have onboard flash anyway. Build quality is plastic, butdefinitely more solid than the 18-70 kit lens that I use, whichI think is solid enoug as it is.

I don't know much about the 28-200 you mention so wouldnt want to say either way, but wouldlook intoafew things first -
  • autofocus wont be as fast as AFS on the24-120 (although I assume IF stands for internal focusing so shouldn't be that badI would have thought)[/*]
  • 28mm is 42mm equivalent in 35mm terms - is that wide enough for what you'll be shooting ?[/*]
  • 28 to 200 is quite a long focal range, so might affect optics / picture quality ?
Fred Miranda's site often haslens userreviews

jimbojetset is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 8:21 AM   #3
Senior Member
Ronnie948's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721

I can't tell you anything about the 28/200 but I can fill you in on the 24/120"VR" lens. It is the lens I use for 99.9% of my photographs. I have an 85 1.8 that I only use if I really need to blur out a background a whole lot. I only needed to use it one time in the last two months. The 24/120"VR" does everything I need it to do on my D100. I shoot weddings, race cars ,dogs, portraits (in my studio or on location) and scene's to enter into my camera club shows.

The "VR" feature is just great. it allows me to shoot as low as 1/30th handholding without any problem with shake at all. If you do use a tripod you just turn off the "VR"function. I don't even take a tripod to do weddings anymore.

Iused to use a Hasselblad and about 40 or 50 pounds of equipment for shooting weddings. I only use my D100,24/120"VR"lens, and a SB28DX flash on a Stroboframe swivel bracket now. No film expenses at all and the end product is actually better then the old days of film.Plus I can actually make a better profit now on my photography.

My opinion is for you to go for the 24 rather then the 28 because I think it is more useful in the long run. The "VR" is very useful 75% of the time and it is just a good all around lens.
Ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 11:13 AM   #4
Senior Member
Morris's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 113

I tried the 28-200 in a store...but when you get used to a lens with the AF-S system like the 18-70mm lens, you find that the regular lens are a little bit slugish. So, I would definitively go for the 24-120VR.
Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 4:47 PM   #5
Junior Member
pokeeemon's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3

Thanks a lot for your help guys. i was definitly leaning toward the 24-120mm af-s VR lense too. I was just hoping to save some money from buying the 28-200 lense... i guess i'll get what i paid for huh.
pokeeemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 30, 2005, 8:20 PM   #6
Junior Member
twmangrove's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 20

Though I am probably too late for my input to have any significance, I use both of these lenses with my D70, the 28-200mm G and the 24-120mm VR. I think that if I were to keep one I would the former, though this is mainly because I can get more money for the 24-120. Both are fine, though there are important differences.
1) speed: The 24-120 is faster, and if it does hunt it doesn't take as long as the 28-200. However, there is a limiter switch on the latter that helps with this.
2) flash: for some reason I just find that the 28-200mm works better with my SB-600. The exposure is tends to to be a little too high with the 24-120, and requires adjusting-beyond the regular circumstantial adjustments.
3) IMPORTANT!!-BATTERY DRAIN - VR sucks power from your camera quickly. Since its operation really only works at the 120-end anyhow, remember to turn it off. If not, you'll find your shots/battery average decreased significantly.
I just want to add that I use the 28-200 to shoot hockey indoors with a flash. It's just so much more flexible, usually fast enough focus-wise to track the action, and works terrifically with the flash. For a quick, light, cheap (I paid $260 CDN new for mine), ED glass-ladened (3 elements for CA control-better than both 70-300mm Nikkors which I've also tried), it's really a sweet little lens. The 24-120mm is great for mid-range, but the quality of photos aren't any better.
twmangrove is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:38 AM.