FORUM NIKONCLUB

Talvolta mi va di girare con una fotocamera sul collo. Poco peso non guasta nelle gite fuori porta. Amici e due foto senza grandi pensieri. Ho pensato ai pochi etti (tre e qualcosa) del 24-50. Poche opinioni su internet e non mi sembra sul nostro forum. Qualcuno lo conosce? Discreto, buono o modesto zoomettino della domenica?
Saluti
Marco

Messaggio modificato da mistercoki il Feb 21 2008, 08:29 PM

Il 24-50/3,3-4,5 AF era, al tempo (1987 la presentazione), uno zoom piuttosto buono.
Come prestazioni, si collocava in quella fascia intermedia tra gli entry-level e gli zoom pro luminosi che nei cataloghi di oggi è poco affollata.
Ho avuto modo di usarlo su pellicola con soddisfazione, mai in digitale.

io non l'ho avuto ma, al contrario di altri ne ho sentito parlare come di un obiettivo mediocre su pellicola. su digitale andrebbe provato

Come sempre un riferimento...
Grazie

Avuto su pellicola a me piaceva molto.
venduto per il 24-120, mai mi sono pentito così tanto in vita mia!
ciao
Carlo

Questo è il giudizio di Rorslett sul 24-50 f/ 3.3-4.5 (punteggio 3.5) :
Sometimes I wonder why a particular lens gets so popular. Having a very plasticky feel and a wobbling focusing collar, this zoom lens covers a useful range, but the pictorial results are a mixed bag. Barrel distortion can be quite prominent, and there is a bad tendency for flare and ghosting under adverse light situations. The front threads rotate thus making use of a polariser difficult. The 'macro' setting brings the lens to 0.5 m and thus is more a practical joke from the marketing department than a useful feature.
If you insist on using this lens, put the apertures within the f/5.6-f/11 range for best results. I kept mine for just 2 months before I got rid of it - can't understand why I purchased it in the first place. Sometimes you do act like a fool.

c'è anche un 25-50 f/4
e questo è quello che ne dice Rorslett: Never a volume seller in its days, this long discontinued lens exemplifies the good qualities achievable by a zoom without colour aberrations. Images are sharp corner-to-corner and light fall-off is very low even wide open. It quickly attains peak sharpness at f/5.6 and the image quality holds up well when the lens is stopped down, so even f/16 delivers good results. Compared to e.g. the 20-35 Nikkor, centre sharpness is slightly lower, but corners are much better. Field curvature is moderate and the same holds for the barrel distortion. A crisp rendition extends into the depth-of-field zone to make this an excellent choice for landscape photography. In fact, this was my preferred lens against modern zooms for this very application. Compared to most zooms, the 25-50 is very resistant to flare and ghosting is kept to low levels whenever the front element is carefully cleaned. This is one of my favourite lenses for the F2, F4 and F5 cameras, and it handles nicely, too. You could complain about a rotating front end but that's just nit-picking. A great lens that is sold cheap on the second-hand market. My F2 Titan would be naked without this zoom lens.
Later development shows this even might apply to the D2X for landscape work. Thus, the venerable 25-50 is able to produce silky-smooth images when it is attached to the D2X. There is a roundness and tactility to the image that makes the 25-50 downright enchanting. You might get slightly sharper images with other lenses, but hardly more pleasing to the photographic, inner eye. The virtual lack of distortion, vignetting, and chromatic aberration helps the 25-50 to project its endearing image quality onto the imaging sensor of the D2X.

On the D3, the 25-50 interacts less gracefully and if you intend to use it on the FX camera, near subjects probably will come out better than landscapes.

IR: Its IR performance is troubled by a tendency for a hot spot. Also, some image degradation is seen, plus severe focus shifts along the zoom range. I would not recommend this zoom classic for IR use.