>Ray and Brian don't you think the 24-120 asks more money than >it deserves? Online reviews lead me to that conclusion, though >never had the chance to test one myself. >Hmmm... >Thought it would be great to get away with the cheaper 24-85VR >as a walk around lens and buy a couple of primes for more >serious shooting. Already own a 85mm 1.8D which I absolutely I >love, and a couple of more primes would fill the blanks. >I'm also considering a micro, we'll see. > >Anyway,thanks all for your answers.
Hi Jeff, The thread has moved along a pace since you posted this and some very good opinions too.
For me I decided that agonising over the nth degree of IQ was secondary to me, I gave up 2.8 for 4.0 but gained to me very useful extra reach and VR. For me I was thinking walk around lens and 70mm long end was too short and VR is massive for me.
As it turns out, stopped down, there is no discernible difference in IQ anyway, plus I have 1.8 primes for times I need them. A 50mm prime is hard to beat sometimes.....
The 24-70 is of course legendary, I just found it way too limiting for me for walk around use.
I can't comment on the new 24-85mm as I've not tried one but the 24-120 4.0 VR is the most useful lens I own for FX for me