24-85mm F/2.8-4 or 24-85 F3.5-4.5

[William Cowan]

G'day all

This is my first post to this forum in anticipation of an S2 purchase next month.

For my first lens, I'd like to purchase a good quality medium length zoom. I've read many good and some fair reviews of both of these lenses on this board and others, but am still puzzled as to which one would make the better purchase.

There are times when the faster lens could be handy, however it appears to not be up to the same optical quality as the AF-S lens, which also focuses much faster. Also, the AF-S lens is missing an aperture ring, is this significant in practice?

Any help you could offer would be great.

Cheers

William Cowan

[davealan]

From what I’ve seen and heard, go with the 24-85 F3.5-4.5. Newer design. I just tried one and it tested well for me. There are many reviews of this lens on the web. Focusing action was nearly instantaneous and very silent. Made my Tamron 24-135 sound like a loud grinding toy by comparison.

No aperture ring is actually a plus. The S2 controls the aperture and demands the lens aperture ring to be locked or placed in the minimum f-stop setting. Bumping it off that position leads to and error and the S2 will not work with the lens. No ring means nothing to worry about. These are made for the cameras that control the aperture setting and will not work on the older cameras.

Side note: I returned 24-85 F3.5-4.5, however, because I am considering the upcoming Nikon 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR (Vibration Reduction) Wide Angle Telephoto Zoom, due in June 2003. It replaces the disappointing earlier 24-120. That’s another one to consider.

Dave

[William Cowan]

G'day Dave

Thanks for your thoughts on the AF-S lens. Focusing speed is one of my concerns with the older lens. Is the slower focusing speed of the D lens an issue in practice? I occasionally take photos of moving subjects (The kids running around the back yard, for instance). The local importer of Nikon lenses said it was no issue, that despite being slower, the older lens is still fast enough. He has an interest in selling me the more expesive lens, though.

Is the aperture ring still unused when running the S2 in manual mode?

Cheers

William Cowan

[davealan]

William

I never did see or test the older 2.8 lens, and some suppliers had the newer lens and not the older one. The older one was more expensive and not worth the extra money for the small increase in speed, in my opinion. I can’t confirm if the 2.8 has the Silent Wave Motor, but I see no mention of it. I can attest to the speed of the newer 3.5.

The camera always sets the aperture even in manual mode, and the aperture ring always needs to be locked in the minimum aperture position.

I didn’t test the new 3.5 lens with moving targets, but I did test it from close focus to far focus, back and forth. The Silent Wave Motor 3.5 would focus, lock and stay. My Tamron (perhaps not a good comparison), always had some amount of small “hunt” to achieve focus. The 3.5 just locked - boom! I really liked that. I would have gotten the 24-85 to replace my new Tamron because of the zooming ease and smoothness, and the quick and SILENT focus … but I’m now set to wait for the 24-120 - Silent Wave Motor and VR and longer focal length.

Dave

[ronlcox]

Overall the newer afs-vr will give you a little of everything. Keep in mind that if you are shooting action the vr is of no use as you will require a higher shutter speed which will negate the need for vr. However, higher shutter speed may mean the need for a faster lens depending on the circumstances under which you are shooting. If you have specific needs then that should be formost in choosing the lens your are going to use. But for an all around lens the afs-vr sounds like a good choice.