The successor is twice as expensive. I find the focal length range for a city trip very interesting. I'm also attracted to the image stabilizer. So I initially borrowed the lens. Here my first impression:
The lens is built-quality, here does not wobble when compared to the old 24-120 the front port. But the workmanship is not as good as I expected after the announcement of Nikon. Quote: "The Objekticgehäuse consists mostly of magnesium" If I compare it with my 2,8 17-55, are here in the processing still worlds apart. In particular, the lens hood (and their attachment) seems cheap for a lens in this price range.
Visually, it's really neat for an all-Zoom with the zoom range. Here it is compared to the previous revelation. Sorry, recorded strong, but for the 'normal' photography, it is a good choice. The distortion can be corrected very well in image processing. The VR II works perfectly.
Due to the high practicality (focal length range and VR II), the annual processing and in the knowledge that are necessary for the optimal use of the FX sensor fixed focal lengths, I give four stars.
