Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Disappointed w/ my fancy Nikon zoom
Old 09-22-2016   #1
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Disappointed w/ my fancy Nikon zoom

I just compared my ancient Minolta 35-70 3.5 zoom to my brand spankin' new gee whiz Nikon 24-120 VRII IS AF etc lens. And the Minolta blows it into the weeds. Yeah it is a shorter zoom range, but it is much much older tech etc. And waaaay cheaper. The Minolta lens is sharp like a fixed focal length, the Nikkor disappoints like zooms tend to do.
Shot both on film - one with the XK, the other with an F6. I'm wondering if the VR is actually hurting not helping w film images, so will try one more roll w the VR off.

Ming Thein wrote this about VR

https://blog.mingthein.com/2016/08/1...up-to-a-point/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-22-2016   #2
dee
Registered User
 
dee's Avatar
 
dee is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: M25 south UK
Posts: 1,861
That Minolta 35-70 is superb with my Sony A290/A35 .
I bought a Minolta 505Si with silver 35-70 at the airport on the way to a rare holiday to Toronto. It was intended as a simple point and shoot to complement my heavy 700i with sigma lens .The 7000i did not get a look in , I was amazed at the quality of the shots from this cheap combination .
I bought the A290 as a cheap way to use this lens as the crop factor is perfect for architectural details .
I ended up extending to a Sony A35 with a pair of zooms , but in truth , the A290 with it's CCD colours suits me perfectly .
dee.
__________________
Amedeo Contaxed Leica M8 + Brian Sweeney J3 + Helios .CV 35mm f2.5 Fed 50 collapsible
Classic Leica Dig3 / Panasonic L1 Olympus zooms
Quirky Pentax K-S1
Fuji X-Pro 1 and X-M1 joined by neat X-T1

Contax/Kiev hybrids - Contax II silver /tan , Contax III + Kiev IV meter etc , Contax II , Kiev shutter from parts camera .
Minolta SR1s/SR7v/SRTs various !

Puns,Cameras and snapshots keeping ASD and dees'ruptive Girl/Boy/Me?' dee'structive dee'sorientation contained.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-22-2016   #3
Waus
Registered User
 
Waus's Avatar
 
Waus is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 257
The Minolta lens is a gem!-Leica used this (lens)design for their 35-70mm...
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-22-2016   #4
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,497
I have done thousands of pics with my 24/120. Perfect no. But the convenience is worth it under some conditions.

It is not so bad customers would notice. I barely do. It is favorable with my 1.4 Nikor G primes.

You might have a bad sample. Maybe it does not do well on film.

Try a good tripod , mirror up, and no VR.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-22-2016   #5
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
I have done thousands of pics with my 24/120. Perfect no. But the convenience is worth it under some conditions.

It is not so bad customers would notice. I barely do. It is favorable with my 1.4 Nikor G primes.

You might have a bad sample. Maybe it does not do well on film.

Try a good tripod , mirror up, and no VR.
I'll try with no VR but not the rest as I want to replicate my normal shooting environment. Maybe my expectations are too high, or maybe it is just better on digital as the digi cameras' software automatically runs optical corrections/sharpening etc.
Just that my Minolta zoom that cost me $80 is such a cracker in comparison shooting in the same way.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-2016   #6
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,307
The VR on most Nikon zooms is not designed for shutter speed faster than 1/250. (link).

I abandoned Nikon because of their contemporary lens offerings. I felt the performance was just good enough and not worth the brand price premium.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-2016   #7
MikeMGB
Registered User
 
MikeMGB's Avatar
 
MikeMGB is offline
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
The VR on most Nikon zooms is not designed for shutter speed faster than 1/250. (link).

I abandoned Nikon because of their contemporary lens offerings. I felt the performance was just good enough and not worth the brand price premium.
I sold my fancy Nikon gear a couple of months ago, the lenses were not sharp and chromatic aberration was terrible, even on pro lenses.
__________________
35mm, 120, 127, 620, 116, LTM, M, M42, TLR
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-2016   #8
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
The VR on most Nikon zooms is not designed for shutter speed faster than 1/250. (link).
Thanks for the link! I will definitely turn it off and try again. All my shots were taken in bright light so the speed would have been higher than that.

I'm hoping performance would kick up several notches because it has been a while since I've had buyer's remorse, and don't want it now!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-2016   #9
flavio81
Registered User
 
flavio81 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
I Nikon 24-120 VRII
This lens is infamous on the web as one of the worst Nikon zoom lenses.

I think i've read an analysis by Marco Cavina where it is shown that the optical design is very good, but the manufacturing decisions made the lens go invariably into misalignment on practical use.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-2016   #10
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by flavio81 View Post
This lens is infamous on the web as one of the worst Nikon zoom lenses.

I think i've read an analysis by Marco Cavina where it is shown that the optical design is very good, but the manufacturing decisions made the lens go invariably into misalignment on practical use.
The reviews I've seen from pro users have the opposite reaction.

https://photographylife.com/reviews/...4-120mm-f4g-vr


https://blog.mingthein.com/2015/05/0...afs-24-120-vr/

Perhaps you are thinking of the previous version which was a 24-120 3.5-5.6 variable aperture lens? Not this f4 lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2016   #11
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMGB View Post
I sold my fancy Nikon gear a couple of months ago, the lenses were not sharp and chromatic aberration was terrible, even on pro lenses.
Exactly!





12345678910
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2016   #12
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Thanks for the link! I will definitely turn it off and try again. All my shots were taken in bright light so the speed would have been higher than that.

...
My pleasure. I hope this helps!
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2016   #13
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
So there was a custom car show one street over from my gallery today. Thought this would make some fun subjects to test the F6 and 24-120 w/o the VR turned on. Battery indicator level on the camera showed full. Took 10 shots - now it was at 50%! Took 3 more and on lucky #13 the mirror stayed up, the camera was locked up with dead batteries.
Of course today I didn't bring a spare set cuz I was only going to shoot one roll, and the camera showed full charge...
Stoopid Watson rechargeable batteries...

When I got home and put a fresh set in, the camera unlocked. The whole time I was thinking that I would have been totally fine if I used any of my mechanical cameras... Technology, who needs it?

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2016   #14
ChrisLivsey
Registered User
 
ChrisLivsey's Avatar
 
ChrisLivsey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMGB View Post
chromatic aberration was terrible, even on pro lenses.
Current lens designs from Nikon are intended to be shot on the current and recent digital bodies with the built in lens correction files, a new version which is uploadable has been recently released. Nikon doesn't love film anymore, their recent competitions specifically exclude film entries.
Perhaps, and I have no experience, the third party zooms such as Sigma and Tamron, will perform better as they cannot rely on the software/firmware to fudge the result?
__________________
Fishing for shadows in a pool.
Louis Macneice

http://www.flickr.com/photos/red_eyes_man/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2016   #15
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,596
Not great optically I agree but very versatile .. I find the pincushion distortion at the long end the worst part of this lens.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2016   #16
unixrevolution
Registered User
 
unixrevolution's Avatar
 
unixrevolution is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 36
Posts: 874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
So there was a custom car show one street over from my gallery today. Thought this would make some fun subjects to test the F6 and 24-120 w/o the VR turned on. Battery indicator level on the camera showed full. Took 10 shots - now it was at 50%! Took 3 more and on lucky #13 the mirror stayed up, the camera was locked up with dead batteries.
Of course today I didn't bring a spare set cuz I was only going to shoot one roll, and the camera showed full charge...
Stoopid Watson rechargeable batteries...

When I got home and put a fresh set in, the camera unlocked. The whole time I was thinking that I would have been totally fine if I used any of my mechanical cameras... Technology, who needs it?

Most of the equipment failures I have suffered, photographically or otherwise, have to do with a dead battery.

Complete side note: Am I the only one who thinks English should pick separate words for a battery that has no charge, and one that doesn't work at all (i.e. normally rechargeable but wont' charge, won't work in any way?)
__________________
Please, call me Erik.
Find me on: Flickr | PentaxForums | Large Format Photography Forum

"I decided to stop collecting cameras and become a photographer."
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2016   #17
Jdi
Registered User
 
Jdi is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 119
Haven't shot Nikons in years. However, when I did Nikon very clearly stated if you don't need VR, keep it off. Have you read the manual that came with the lens? At least back then, Nikon had one of their white papers on the Support site that explained their position.

Now shoot Fuji. Same, don't use it if you don't need it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2016   #18
pvdhaar
Zoom with your feet!
 
pvdhaar's Avatar
 
pvdhaar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by flavio81 View Post
This lens is infamous on the web as one of the worst Nikon zoom lenses..
There are now three versions of the 24-120.. There's the original AF-D one without VR, the variable aperture one with VR and there's the latest constant f4 aperture one.

It's especially the first AF-D version that has the worst reputation, and I can see where that's coming from.. The copy I had wouldn't give crisp images unless stopped down to f11-f16, and suffered incredible pincushion distortion at 35mm. I'm now shooting with the 3.5-5.6VR version, and it's much better behaved, sharpness is acceptable at f8 already and the distortion seems less pronounced as well. Granted, it doesn't come anywhere near the performance of the f2.8 zooms, but it's quite versatile. Haven't shot the f4 version, so can't comment on that..
__________________
Kind regards,

Peter

My Hexländer Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2016   #19
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Shot the roll today w/ fresh batteries, and only had the VR on at speeds < 1/60.
I usually use a protective filter, but kept that off today just to eliminate any other possibilities.
If the pics still aren't sharp as expected, then I'll most probably unload it .
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2016   #20
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
So for the purpose of scientific testing, I acquired a D750 and tested the lens.
It is very sharp on the D750 which tells me that there is some processing software at play, that obviously is not available with film cameras.

So... remember how the conventional wisdom is that digital cameras need much higher quality lenses than film cameras? Well, it seems that this is a maybe..

This 24-120 VR4, latest version, is not great on film, but is excellent on digital.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2016   #21
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
So for the purpose of scientific testing, I acquired a D750 and tested the lens.
It is very sharp on the D750 which tells me that there is some processing software at play, that obviously is not available with film cameras.

So... remember how the conventional wisdom is that digital cameras need much higher quality lenses than film cameras? Well, it seems that this is a maybe..

This 24-120 VR4, latest version, is not great on film, but is excellent on digital.
It appears that the term "lens" is now a catch all for "everything that happens to the light between the subject and raw file being written". So, yeah, they need better "lenses" it's just that most of the "lens" is no longer made or an optically transparent material...
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2016   #22
Merkin
For the Weekend
 
Merkin is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 867
Back when I had a Nikon DSLR kit, I used their 35-70 f2.8d macro zoom from the nineties/2000s and absolutely loved it, despite it being a "dust pump" design. It wasn't the best lens I have ever used at any given focal length, and it wasn't the best macro lens I've ever used, but it was good at every focal length and it was fine for macro in a pinch, despite only being macro capable at 35mm. You might be a lot happier with one of those.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2016   #23
pvdhaar
Zoom with your feet!
 
pvdhaar's Avatar
 
pvdhaar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merkin View Post
Back when I had a Nikon DSLR kit, I used their 35-70 f2.8d macro zoom from the nineties/2000s and absolutely loved it, despite it being a "dust pump" design. It wasn't the best lens I have ever used at any given focal length, and it wasn't the best macro lens I've ever used, but it was good at every focal length and it was fine for macro in a pinch, despite only being macro capable at 35mm. You might be a lot happier with one of those.
I agree 100%.. The 35-70 is one of the lenses from the film era that still stands its ground today. Despite its limited zoom factor, I regularly use it on the D750 because of its image quality and focusing speed. Of all the screwdriver AF lenses that I've ever used, it's by far the fastest.
__________________
Kind regards,

Peter

My Hexländer Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2016   #24
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
 
ColSebastianMoran's Avatar
 
ColSebastianMoran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,339
Another vote for the AF Nikkor 35-70 f/2.8 D. Great lens. Big & heavy, but very good images throughout the range. The reasonable macro is frosting on the cake.
__________________
Col. Sebastian Moran, ret. (not really)

In Classifieds Now: Nothing.
Use this link to leave feedback for me.

Named "Best heavy-game shooter in the Eastern Empire." Clubs: Anglo-Indian, Tankerville, and Bagatelle Card Club.
Sony E/FE, Nikon dSLR, and iPhone digital. Misc film.
Birds, portraits, events, family. Mindfulness, reflection, creativity, and stance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-29-2016   #25
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Just realized the flaw in my initial conclusion. I have yet to get my film test roll back where I shot with the VR turned off at speeds above 1/250. My not so sharp shots had the VR turned on all the time, even though the shutter speeds were high.

What I know so far is that it is sharp on digital.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2016   #26
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Sharp on digital:


This lens is very very sweet on the D750. What I did notice was that very noticeable changes were made to the image when using the lens profiles in LR. W/o this there would be lots of distortion.
This could be why it is not very good on film. There is no raw data saved for LR, so LR does not know what aperture or focal length was used, so cannot apply any corrections.

Bottom line , the 24-120 VR4 G is most excellent on a digital body.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-19-2016   #27
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
On the F6 again, with VR turned off

  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:44.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.