In article <3283B828.7679@slip.net>, thirdperson@slip.net says...

> [....] .................................................... Nikon
>could make a 24-120 that's a 2.8. The question is would anyone buy it
>at the weight, size, and cost it would have to be. In this case I think
>they clearly felt the market they were aiming for would prefer smaller
>size and weight and reasonable cost. I think this also explains why
>they would allow it to have zoom creep. They intend for it to be used
>as a great knockaround, do-all travel lens. They do not envision it
>being used on a tripod for fine-art landscapes or all-day, roll after
>roll of macro work. They make other lenses that are superbly designed
>for those purposes. If they could figure out how to make one lens that
>is all things to all photographers (the proverbial 8mm-1000mm f/2.8 1:1
>macro zoom that weighs 14 ounces and costs $399) they would do it. So
>far they haven't figured out how.

Excellent points - zooms designs are compromises (as are primes, if
the truth be known...). But in terms of zoom design, the Nikkor 24-120mm
is remarkable (though it is not a constant f2.8, etc. [but, then the
limited-range 35-70mm f2.8 isn't too great at f2.8, anyway....]).
BTW, in terms of a tripod mounted rig (using f11 or so), the 24-120mm
Nikkor is just about perfect for landscape, being VERY sharp (better
than any other wide-angle, or wide-range, zoom that I have seen) over
its whole range at smaller stops, and quite sharp at f5.6 or so over
most of its range if one is into hand-holding it for landscapes...
The lens is even good at 24mm as a low available-light lens, being at
least as good as the excellent prime 24mm f2.8 Nikkor (but longer
than 24mm, other lenses would be better for low-light work). Limited-DOF
photos at the long end would also be better handled by faster primes.
The lens is awkward to use on a tripod when pointed up or down due to
the zoom "creep" (well, "run", actually...;-), though a little masking
tape could reduce that problem.... Even at close focus, performance is excellent at the short end, and again around 70mm at f5.6, and should
be excellent throughout at f11 (all negative comments refer to
edge/corner performance, NOT to central performance, which is excellent throughout in this ONE sample that I have tried). So, used with an
understanding of its (surprisingly few) shortcomings and compromises,
this is an amazing lens! There are VERY few zooms (or primes!) sharper
than this lens around f11, and this lens goes from 24mm to 120mm!
Heck, I generally dislike zooms (especially wide-angle ones), and I'm
still excited about this lens!
Hope This Helps