Nikon 24-85 F2.8-4D Af Zoom Nikkor

I bought this lens in a hurry after my trusty old Nikkor 35-70mm packed up. I was looking for a good all round lens that I could leave on the camera 85% of the time that would be a complement to my D3. I wasn't disappointed.
The 24-85 is quite a fat lens and not amazingly light but it balances well on bigger bodies like the D3.
There is some distortion noticeable at the 24mm end resulting in bendy vertical lines and the like, but I haven't noticed any problems at the 85mm end.
I used the lens extensively during a two week holiday in Thailand and found it to be very useful - wide enough to use for most landscape shots and enought telephoto to grab quick long-range or candid shots.
Overall, a great lens, and a useful addition to my kit

I bought this following on from a Nikon 24-70 f2.8, which, whilst outstanding was simply too heavy and bulky to act as a suitable 'walkaround' lens for holidays etc. I sold the much loved 24-70 (for almost exactly what I'd paid for it! - good glass holds its value well) and bought this as a lighter and more convenient solution. Ultimately, its all about wanting to take the camera with you everywhere, and being able to use it without getting too knackered from carrying it around, and for those purposes this 24-85 mm lens fits the bill far better than the 24-70 could. Optically it is not in the same league, but for my 'general photography' (ie not specialised project stuff) purposes, its not too far away.

This is an older 'D' design lens, and therefore lacks VR (not remotely required in any case for this type of lens) and the AF-S SWM focus motor common on newer designs. You might think therefore that you will end up with blurry pictures from slow focussing and camera shake - but this is not the case at all. Remember that VR and AFS are new age marketing gimmicks, and really do not assist decent photographers much at all. How did we ever cope without this technology? Quite nicely actually.

Focus - screw driven (so no good for D3000/5000/40/60) is very fast and accurate on my D300. The focus range is so short that the camera gets this 24-85 in perfect focus just as quickly as it would a newer AFS design. Do not let perceived focus speed put you off. Low-light focus is just as impressive. Shooting at ISO 3200 in almost darkness presented no problems at all, with no focus hunt unless you deliberately look to make it happen. Of course at 24mm, using the f2.8 max aperture the chances of getting much out of focus are fairly remote in any event, but that is another, longer discussion about optics which really isn't helpful in a review.

VR - Remember the comment above about ISO 3200 performance? Well, perhaps that is when you would really want VR, but I happily handheld in almost darkness at shutter speeds of 1/15 and 1/8 and got some very sharp results. Perhaps I have a steady hand, but the balance of this lens means that it is easy to hand-hold at low shutter speeds and to get good results.

What is important is the optical performance, and here this lens really sings. I was dubious at first having shot some test pics, but then when using it properly for a three day trip comprising my son's first birthday, and a weekend in Brussels, I shot over 500 photographs in all light and achieved some superb results. Crisp, sharp, contrasty - I love this lens, and it fully deserves five stars. If you spend your life worrying about straight line distortion etc then frankly you are worrying about the wrong thing entirely. Does the end result look good and please you? If the answer is yes then this is the lens for you. Ultimately we all surely enjoy photography as a hobby (or sideline (very!) small income earner in my case) for the results we produce? If we worry about MTF, pin-cushion, CA, ghosts etc (I could go on and on) then our focus is on the wrong thing. Some will tell you that this lens will be no good because it has variable aperture at the max-end, its old, and it distorts (it doesn't). Ultimately, you decide. Buy it, take lots of photographs with it, and make your own judgement. I love it.

What about the 16-85 with the D300? I used to own one, and sold it to fund the 24-70 and then this, simply as I plan to go FX very shortly. Otherwise the 16-85 would still be happily in use, as it is just as good as this 24-85.

The bottom line with this lens is that it is less than half the price of the 24-70mm f/2.8G, which is hard to justify unless it is a lens you are using every day all day. My main reason for buying this lens was that it has a large 2.8 aperture but a much cheaper price than the 24-70. This reduces to f4 at its longest end, but in practice in normal use this means if you work in 24-55 range most of the time you are only losing half a stop. It doesn't have vr but vr is not really such an issue in shorter focal lengths and the subject matter often dictates the need for a faster shutter speed anyway. Build quality is certainly good enough.

My personal experience with this lens is that it seemed optimised more for mid distance range subjects and the results on landscape type shots has been rather disappointing. This may be just a batch variation, but given that the lens has a macro focus setting it is quite possible that this is how it was designed.
In summary, I think this is a good lens for people/portrait type work on an FX camera and general all rounder on a FX. If the 24-70mm f/2.8G plummeted in price I would buy that, but I don't think that will happen. For landscape or architectural work I would opt of a cheaper small aperture zoom or fixed lens and spend the money saved on a good tripod.