In article
>I am planning to buy a "universal" zoom for occasions when I want to carry
>only one lens. Can anyone comment on the optical quality of these two
>lens? Is one sharper than the other? All advice is appreciated.
I have tried one sample of each (sample variation in zooms is quite
noticeable, even with Nikkors, and the wider the zoom range, the
more likely it is to be noticeable). The 24-120 was quite good
throughout (though noticeably inferior to Nikkor primes) by
f5.6, and first-rate (about equal to good primes) by f11.
The 28-200mm was as good as most good zooms from about 40-100mm,
OK at 28mm, and well below average for Nikkor zooms above about 120mm.
The two lenses were nearly identical in appearance. The 24-120 has a
constant (and close!) minimum focus distance, the 28-200 minimum
distance varied with FL, but was OK. I would almost always
go for primes over zooms for speed, ease of use, and image
quality reasons, but if you must choose between these two,
I would choose the 24-120mm...
David Ruether
http://www.fcinet.com/ruether