Strangely, didn't get the original post to this so pieced together from snips.
I've been using the 24-120 VR since it came out. I'd say 2.5 stops under the right conditions (perhaps a very overcast day). I'd agree to 1.5 - 2 generally. I've messed around with it in low light shooting bands on a D1x just to see what I could get out of it because not changing lens with that focal range is great when you're stuck with 3 songs. Disregarding the VR, I don't think the lens is optically up to the AF-S 28-70 although I haven't tested it in equivalent conditions with any degree of scientific endeavour. It's smaller than the 28-70 and not as well made as suggested by the price. You'll get vignetting at 24 esp and the first one I had tended to be soft to the left of the frame. Not a bad lens but not a pro lens in my opinion. It serves for situations where you need to get the shot versus achieving optimal quality. I think Nikon bill it as a travel photographer's lens and it is lighter than a 28-70. Not seeing the original thread puts me at a disadvantage in understanding what you're shooting so am painting broad strokes. You can get 1/125th at f/11 but I'd probably opt for a slightly higher ISO to be safe. I think you'll need to experiment depending on your subject matter. If you're buying one, test it thoroughly first and evaluate on a laptop - there were production issues with earlier lenses and you're likely to encounter these flaws in second hand stock - the softness at the left of the frame being one such issue. Hope this helps Alex > Has someone out there both these lenses and can mabey give me any idea > what to expect from the VR lens? Also Nikon claim that you gain 3 stops > using the VR technology (i.e. 3 stops on the shutter speed - i my case I should > be able to shoot at 1/125th and f/11) - does this statement hold? =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
