Interestingly Ken Rockwell
has answered one of my questions regarding the new 24-120 VR vs the 28-300 VR:
"The new 24-120 is as sharp as the 28-300mm VR. In fact, some times the less expensive 28-300mm is sharper, and both are excellent."
and he continues:
"Therefore, I see no reason to pay $250 more for the 24-120. I think Nikon has introduced so many new lenses that someone got confused and reversed the prices, since the 28-300mm is by far the more desirable lens, and costs less."
And he ends with:
"Get your 28-300 before everyone else figures this out, and they either sell-out or the price goes up. My new 24-120mm is going back, quickly. It's much less useful than the 28-300mm, which focuses as close, too. Nikon's pricing mistake is our gain!"
It's in typical Ken Rockwell style and I cannot check whether he's right as I have no access to the new 24-120. But looking at Nikon's own test-shots makes me believe that Ken is right.
That indeed would support that the 28-300 is a real nice super-zoom for all (aspiring) FX-shooters
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews
, My Pictures
, My Photography Blog