24-120 lenses are missing

I have been scouting around for a 24-120 lens, the old one from

Nikon. I noticed that Adorama no longer lists this lens or the new

VR lens of similar range on its website. Has anybody manged to buy

a new 24-120 lens with our without VR?

I have the VR version. 2 Weeks after the official release, it was briefly available on B&H for about 2 days, then it was out of stock again.

Well, the 24-120mm VR lens is a hot commodity and between waiting lists and brisk walk-in and Internet sales, it will probably be out of stock in most stores for a little while, until production catches up. If I understand the situation correctly, there weren't a ton of older 24-120mm lenses on shelves or in Torrance, so supplies of those are probably rather low.

 

You should look at 24-120mm AFD lenses used. My store has taken on two in as many weeks from people who are getting the VRs.

Eric, do you have any personal experience with that old 24-120 AF-D? I've heard that

it suffers from auto focus errors wide open, sacrificing sharpness. Also heard that

there's some vignetting troubles when a step up ring is used to enable 77mm filters.

 

What I haven't heard is anything difinitive about the new VR version. Too new I

suppose. Of particular interest to me would be the distortion, along with any

vignetting, I know that the older version has some marked distortion at the wide end.

 

So, any info that you can pass on would be appreciated.

There are enormous threads dealing with the 24-120 vr at http://

www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1030 beginning more than a month

ago. Many people seem to be having problems with the right hand side of the image

being out of focus and are returning them. Perhaps Nikon is holding back on their

production until the problems are solved.

This seemed to be the same situation when the 24-85/2.8-4 came out. The first samples were horribly variable, but after about a year they seemed to be consistently good.

<p>

As far as finding the original 24-120, there are a ton of them on Ebay. I imagine lots of people are trying to unload them in favor of the 24-120 VR.

Thanks Bill, I went in and read some of those posts. Sheesh, this new lens has

problems! I can understand some user error in getting the hang of using a VR lens,

but the optics are off on this puppy. Now we must wait for that issue to be dealt with

before we are likely to get an authoritative review of the lens, and how it stacks up in

actual use. It's not actually fast enough for me anyway, but sometimes I get caught up

in the excitement of a new product, and think that I'd like to have it. :o)

Carl,

 

I'm sorry - I should have given you the link to the bulk of the discussions specifically

about the 24-120 vr. It is http://search.dpreview.com/forums/

search.asp?query=24-120+vr&forum=1021. Those that get good samples of this

lens seem to be thrilled by it. It would seem to be a vast improvement over the 24-

120D, which may not be saying much since the 24-120D is the second to worst

nikkor that photodo.com has ever analysed (http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/

nikkor.shtml).

 

Unfortunately, even those that appreciate the sharpness of the lens mention the

obvious barrel distortion at the short end, and many of the posted photos bear this

out - and these photos have already been extensively cropped by the digital chip! I

was hoping that the aspheric elements were specifically added to reduce the barrel

distortion that makes the 24-120D so useless. ( Well, I guess if you delete straight

lines from your photographic vocabulary it would be not quite as useless).

 

I'm ranting a little here because as I push 60 my eyes have gone (hence a switch to

AF) and my nerves have gone (hence the appeal of VR) . This lens has the specs of a

real winner for nikon and me - great range, AF-S, ED, Aspherics, VR, and even an

appealingly simple design. That it seems to be coming up short (in common with

many nikon productions these days) is a real dissappointment.

"Carl,

 

 

I'm sorry -"

 

Horse pucky Bill, you've nothing to apologize for. There's enough in the random

sampling of this lens to cause concern. Who wants to buy a lens that may have to go

right back to Nikon because it isn't correct? After some years of wear and lord knows

what else maybe, but immediately strikes me as a tad too soon. Actually that info was

the first I've heard aside from the manufacturers rhetoric. I'm not into being a test

pilot when I pay the bill. Now if Nikon wants my opinion, and no, I don't know why the

would, then they can pay the bill by sending me the lens on a trial basis. :o)

 

I should not be surprised that a 5X lens has distortion, LOL. I passed that 60 mark

about 4 years ago, so I'm sympathetic, and AF-S, VR get my attention too.

Unfortunately that 70-200 VR went right on by with the price tag it carries. Ken

Rockwell said that newspaper folks call this 5x category 24-120 a "street sweeper",

an apt description, IMO. I have a 50/1.8 and a 20-35/2.8, so I think I'll just go for an

80-200/2.8, and skip the focal lengths in between for now.