Nikon AF-S 24mm f1.8 or Nikon AF-S 24-120mm f4

gman

gman

Messages
11,425
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
It's for the D810 which is now being used by my son. He's starting off with landscapes and urban and finally showing an interest in photography!

Currently, the only lens he has is the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II, which is a great lens but at 1.5kg and 209mm it's heavy, bulky and not exactly inconspicuous.

The 24-120 is half the weight and length. It would give him focal length flexibility, but DXO scores it poorly for sharpness, so perhaps not the best at resolving the D810's sensor?

The 24mm is half the weight again and shorter. It gets an excellent sharpeness score, but it would limit him to one focal length. I'm kind of leaning towards this lens.

Unless there's another lens I'm overlooking, but it has to be £350 or less used and also be AF-S. Trade in for the 70-200mm which is like new is a paltry £325, so will probably keep it.

Any advice would be appreciated.
 
Its a very kind budget for the lad, I'd start him on something much more basic and cheaper, and if he keeps it up or he yearns for something sharper then you can go that direction. £350 is a decent chunk to get somewhere nice to take the photos
 
gman said:
The 24-120 is half the weight and length. It would give him focal length flexibility, but DXO scores it poorly for sharpness, so perhaps not the best at resolving the D810's sensor?
Click to expand...

The 24-120 f4 was a good lens by all accounts. The earlier variable aperture version was garbage, like the 28-200. I tried one and returned it.
 
The 24-120 f4 is a great all-round lens. I use one on my D850 most of the time - it's been my favourite walkabout lens for almost ten years. I previously used it on a 610, 800 and 810 too.

I think it's incredibly sharp for a 'kit' lens and found it to be better than the 24-70 f2.8, so sold the 2.8. The 70-200 f2.8 is the nicest for sure and is only my second favourite due to its weight.
 
24-120/4 is an excellent lens, and found out that it is a better all-round performer than the non-VR 24-70/2.8. I bought mine 15 years ago to partner my D3, and since then been used on D7100, D500 and D810 - now on the D850.

Gets used more than my Z24-120, strangely enough.

Like Trevor's 24-70, mine was sold and not replaced.
 
I've noticed referencing to the 24-70mm, but that's never been on the table and it's the 24mm f1.8 prime I'm looking at.

I've been looking through a lot of photos at explorecams of both lenses, specifically on the D810, and looking beyond what are clearly differences in photographer skill, I'm not really seeing a noticeable difference in actual resolving quality between the two.

The spanner has been thrown!
 
welshwizard645 said:
The D810 can use earlier AF-D lenses Gman, so why do you say you need AF-S?
Click to expand...

When looking used they are cheap enough, so may as well get the faster and quieter focusing. That being said, I have been looking at the 24mm f2.8D as well, it could be a super cheap alternative to see how he gets on with a 24mm focal length.

The Nikon AF-S 18-35mm f3.5-4.5G ED is also one I'm looking at.
 
The 24mm is a great lens for wide stuff.

My general purpose lens is a Sigma 24-105 which is pretty much equivalent to a Nikon 24-120 (but heavier). With a D810 it is pretty big and heavy.

The 24mm is really good and with a D810 has a lot of crop ability. For buildings I'd go with the Nikon 18-35 AFS which is light and rather good. (Not the D version of the 18-35).

For most things I think a 24-120 would be better.
 
Should I be worried about moisture inside the optics (but apparently doesn't affect image quality)?
 
Yes, as youll never be able to get rid of it and fungus absolutely loves moisture, lenses like that are on their way out, MBP should be selling them at bargain bucket and having someone take the risk on trying to service it
 
thedistrictline said:
Yes, as youll never be able to get rid of it and fungus absolutely loves moisture, lenses like that are on their way out, MBP should be selling them at bargain bucket and having someone take the risk on trying to service it
Click to expand...

Cheers, seems like everything used I'm looking at has moisture in the lens.
 
Used the 24-120 f4 for years as my goto wedding lens, prefered the extra reach over the 24-70 2.8 and the vr made is sharp enough. Step back a little and zoom in for better image separation at f4.
The 50 1.8 however is an excellent lens and always in my bag if low light or shallow dof is needed.
That being said my walk round is a d3200 with a 35 1.8 light sharp and fun to use. Will probably get a d5300 for hill walking as well
 
Sigma 24mm f1.4 DG HSM Art looks interesting. I think it was the 20mm version I had some time ago and it was a lovely lens.
 
How old is the lad? You know what I'd go with the 28-80mm G, its good enough for beginners stopped down and gives enough room to find what focal length he likes, sounds like you might be shopping for the focal length he might like or you might like :ROFLMAO: ( which I dont blame you)

And its £40!
 
thedistrictline said:
How old is the lad? You know what I'd go with the 28-80mm G, its good enough for beginners stopped down and gives enough room to find what focal length he likes, sounds like you might be shopping for the focal length he might like or you might like :ROFLMAO: ( which I dont blame you)

And its £40!
Click to expand...
This is a nice lens. Go for the one which is f/3.3 at its widest. Super light to. The old 28-105 is really good to.
 
Erty said:
This is a nice lens. Go for the one which is f/3.3 at its widest. Super light to. The old 28-105 is really good to.
Click to expand...

I had the 28-105 on a D610. It's OK, not up to modern zoom standards, but very cost-effective.
 
The 28-80mm and 28-105mm look interesting. I'll look at them more closely.

I also still like the AF-S 18-35mm f3.5-4.5G ED but getting frustrated with "excellent" still having moisture in it. How can that be excellent?

Ffordes don't mention moisture.
 
is it MBP, their conditions are mainly cosmetic only so its in great condition albeit the s*** in the lens, FFordes would say and ring them up to check, ive bought lots from them as it always as described, ive heard they can be bit funny with returns but not had that problem yet, look at realcamera too, great northern store, MBP has the best warranty annoylingly
 
thedistrictline said:
is it MBP, their conditions are mainly cosmetic only so its in great condition albeit the s*** in the lens, FFordes would say and ring them up to check, ive bought lots from them as it always as described, ive heard they can be bit funny with returns but not had that problem yet, look at realcamera too, great northern store, MBP has the best warranty annoylingly
Click to expand...

Aye. I'll need to be careful and check first.
 
gman said:
Sigma 24mm f1.4 DG HSM Art looks interesting. I think it was the 20mm version I had some time ago and it was a lovely lens.
Click to expand...
If the Sigma 24mm is on your list I would also consider the Sigma 24-35mm F2 ART lens. Brilliant lens which I used on my D750, D810, D850 and with the FTZii adapter on my Z8 & ZF. It's a heavy lens but will give your lad a bit more flexibility over a 24mm Prime.
 
Instead of worrying about the sharpest (or whatever) lens maybe consider the most useful. Something like a 28-300 for example. I saw one landscape competition won by a photo taken with Nikon's version and found mine perfectly acceptable.

At a later date maybe home in on a 'better' lens that covers the most used focal lengths.

Just my unpopular opinion.
 
Swanseajack said:
If the Sigma 24mm is on your list I would also consider the Sigma 24-35mm F2 ART lens. Brilliant lens which I used on my D750, D810, D850 and with the FTZii adapter on my Z8 & ZF. It's a heavy lens but will give your lad a bit more flexibility over a 24mm Prime.
Click to expand...

I was looking at that because I do like the ART lenses, but it is still quite heavy. I really want to get the lens weight down to <500kg <500g (whoops)
 
Last edited:
Ed Sutton said:
Instead of worrying about the sharpest (or whatever) lens maybe consider the most useful. Something like a 28-300 for example. I saw one landscape competition won by a photo taken with Nikon's version and found mine perfectly acceptable.

At a later date maybe home in on a 'better' lens that covers the most used focal lengths.

Just my unpopular opinion.
Click to expand...

That's a good idea, I'm going to have a look at what focal length he's using with the 70-200mm. If it's 70mm then I'll know to go wider. Although, I think using longer focal lengths for landscape will probably require more experience with regard to composition and remembering the minimum shutter speed (he's not using a tripod), whereas a wide lens tends to be more forgiving.
 
I've found a nice Nikon AF-S 18-35mm f3.5-4.5G ED and went for it. I can compliment it with a zoom sitting in the 24/28 to 70/80mm range later on if necessary. I've decided there's no point selling the 70-200mm, the paltry offer means it's worth more keeping it. It would be a good motorsport or football lens if he ever gets into that.

Thanks for all the help guys, greatly appreciated and it will be a good reference to come back to later on. (y):)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top