These were the candidates:
1. Nikon 2.8 / 24-70
2. Nikon 3.5-4.5 / 24-85
3. Tamron 2.8 / 24-70
4. Nikon 4 / 24-120
5. Nikon 3.5-5.6 / 28-300
6. Old-Nikkor 3.5-4.5 / 28-85
From Tokina I have found nothing. Is there such a FX-Standard Zoom?
Although I was very happy with the Sigma 2.8-4.5 / 17-70 on my D300, was allenorts read that sigma standard zooms are probably not so convincing on FX sonsor. From the series dispersion (I had experienced myself) times to mention. So I have not researched this intense.
No. 1 difference whether the price, weight and soon the longest focal way quickly. However, the processing and imaging performance are great, no doubt.
No. 2 is indeed considered to be sharp, generally good and inexpensive Always plan, but there were occasional complaints that bisweilig dust (!) Occurred lens, which argues against a good seal. Also hot 85mm for me that frequently the 70-300er Nikkor must be angeschaubt. Otherwise, the haptic impression must not be the very best of this piece. I have this lens not tried. My rating is based on my very extensive research.
. No. 3 won the job either, even if the Tamron has occasionally won tests: 82 mm filter diameter are just too much (my current 77 mm falling already on), 70 mm too short and about 900 for Kracher outputting a lens, which (similar to Sigma) probably due to a focus or Abblendungsfehlers again must be returned in order to obtain a correct, I have not seen.
No. 5 might have even made the race (see reviews by Ken Rockwell), but such a "superzoom" means that you have to make too many compromises (vignetting / distortion / Sharpness waste at the telephoto end u. Ä.). As favorable Used when it may be only one lens / can, I would maybe buy myself also.
No. 6 I had from my analog hours. But I could tell at DX that only in certain situations, good photos are possible. Alas, when the sun from the front or the side appears. And the autofocus still drives with Diesel ... So off to the mothballs. If it's been faltering on the D300, how should it then give good results on FX?
So the 4 / 24-120: I've been unpacking and touching very enthusiastic. Pleasant and nice weight fixed term of the zoom ring. Very good impression !! I had a lot of fun. So I shot the first pictures even with the D300. The image stabilizer works very discreetly, but effectively. The pictures had me almost excited, but did not want to admit too early, since the first FX results were still missing my euphoria. It is clear that the larger field of view usually means loss of quality at the edges. But I'm really excited! Even at aperture 4 over all focal lengths do I get I on the D610 very good results. I z. B. yesterday in a photo (shot with Aperture 8) zoomed in 120 mm and found a high resolution! The edge drop is m. E. slight. I had a fear that I ultimately but then must attach the lens from approx 80 mm at telephoto. But this is not so. My 4.5-5.6 / 70-300 Nikkor "smears" against it from 220mm clear from! The barrel distortion in the WW area is significant, in fact, thanks to the D610-automatic function I can here but generate distortion JPGs.
I can recommend this lens to all those who are facing a similar agonizing decision. Also on the D800 seems to deliver a good figure, and with 36 million pixels. It is also a significant relief that 120 mm one saves because of the long (and useful!) Some objective change. Furthermore remains so still an enlarged if it is not just the border area.
Well, the 2,8er panel? A step waiving 4 is no problem at all, because the viewfinder of the D610 is still very light, the AF works flawlessly, ISO increases are not a problem and - as I said - a 82er Filter Diameter I did not want to.
Criticism? Yes. The sun visor is made of thin plastic. Stable but Gandhi. Somehow thin. As if you wanted to save only some plastic here. But that does not detract from the five stars.
Addendum 07.01.2014: Had yesterday a comparison photo with very good resolution SIGMA 2,8 / 70 mm Marco and the Zoom in RECTIFY aperture (8) shot. I have back at the screen and hergeklickt. The difference is not visible in principle. In a single image viewing you probably would just happen to guess the right lens.
