Nikon 24-120 f4 or nikon 24-70 f2.8

rob-nikon

rob-nikon

Messages
6,948
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm looking a short telephoto zoom lens to cover my missing gap of 35-70mm. Currently I'm thinking of either the Nikon 24-120 f4 or nikon 24-70 f2.8. I've seen the 24-120 f4 in the classifieds only a few times and each time they are snapped up in minutes. I'm going to be using it for wildlife portraits and landscapes. Currently all of my lens are f4 (apart from a macro lens) so I don't think that would be a problem. Is the 24-120 f4 as nearly as good as the 24-70 f2.8, is it worth paying the extra? Any users views would be appreciated especially if you have used both.
 
I have never had the Nikkor 24-70 but did have a 3rd party f/2.8 for a while. I now have the 24-120 and it's almost welded to my D750. Yes, it's a stop slower but the D750's high ISO capabilities overcome that. It obviously can't do the shallow DoF things that the f/2.8 lens can but the 24-70 is significantly shorter. (Footzoom is often not an option!) The 24-120 also has VR which is (as yet) not available on the Nikkor 24-70, although IIRC the Tamron version has VC. I have a feeling that the 24-120 shows a little more distortion at the wide end than the 24-70 but I'm stuffed if I can find a landscape where it's noticeable (buildings might show it though.) I think a few people have bought the D750 as a kit with the 24-120 intending to shift the lens on since it's a very good deal from the likes of DR and Panamoz (and, unlike bodies, lenses have a worldwide warranty I think.)
For ME, the extra reach, lower cost and VR made the 24-120 the better choice but (as always) YMMV!
 
I have the 24-70 and have ordered the 24-120 with my new D750. I am hoping the extra reach, VR and the extra ISO capabilities of the D750 don't make me miss the 24-70 when I don't put it in the kit bag. I primarily want to use it for video and capturing family life. It will also be bolted onto the D5500 when I get that to act as a B-Cam until I get my hands on the Sigma 18-35 but the extra reach on the DX body 36-180 may mean it stays on their longer than I anticipated.

Have a look at Flickr to see what has been captured by the 24-120 and you will be surprised. It still can achieve shallow DoF albeit not as much. Nod is it really noticeable?
 
Not to me but I'm not a huge fan of ultra shallow DoF! I'm usually at f/8 for landscapes and that's my main subject.
 
I sold my 24-70 and bought the 24-120 and have absolutely no regrets, it's an ideal walkabout lens with very good IQ and VR as a bonus. Of course if you are only looking for covering 35-70, the older Nikon 35-70 f2.8 is another solidly built lens with good IQ, a clunky macro option but no VR :)
 
Some overlap on the long end would be usefull to stop needing to change lenses so often. Currently I have a 70-200 f4 and 16-35 f4, both are good lenses but there is a big focal length gap between the two when talking wildlife/landscapes. I'm visiting skomer island at the end of June for a 2 day trip. I would like to get some wide angle shots of puffins on the cliffs but still be able to get a longer focal length image. the 16-35 just seems too wide//short and the 70-200 not wide enough. I've thought of the tamron 28-75mm or the older nikon 35-75mm. If I went with the nikon 24-70 f2.8 it's likely the 16-35 would need to go to help fund it. A used 24-120 f4 could mean it may be possible to keep the 16-35.

Nod said:
I have never had the Nikkor 24-70 but did have a 3rd party f/2.8 for a while. I now have the 24-120 and it's almost welded to my D750. Yes, it's a stop slower but the D750's high ISO capabilities overcome that. It obviously can't do the shallow DoF things that the f/2.8 lens can but the 24-70 is significantly shorter. (Footzoom is often not an option!) The 24-120 also has VR which is (as yet) not available on the Nikkor 24-70, although IIRC the Tamron version has VC. I have a feeling that the 24-120 shows a little more distortion at the wide end than the 24-70 but I'm stuffed if I can find a landscape where it's noticeable (buildings might show it though.) I think a few people have bought the D750 as a kit with the 24-120 intending to shift the lens on since it's a very good deal from the likes of DR and Panamoz (and, unlike bodies, lenses have a worldwide warranty I think.)
For ME, the extra reach, lower cost and VR made the 24-120 the better choice but (as always) YMMV!
Click to expand...

Distortion is not too much of an issue as Lightroom has lens profile corrections. Weight-wise the lighter 24-120 f4 with VR and extra reach could be useful.

redlion said:
Have a look at Flickr to see what has been captured by the 24-120 and you will be surprised. It still can achieve shallow DoF albeit not as much. Nod is it really noticeable?
Click to expand...

I've had a look on flickr and there are some good images. The DoF doesn't look too bad for f4.

gramps said:
I sold my 24-70 and bought the 24-120 and have absolutely no regrets, it's an ideal walkabout lens with very good IQ and VR as a bonus. Of course if you are only looking for covering 35-70, the older Nikon 35-70 f2.8 is another solidly built lens with good IQ, a clunky macro option but no VR :)
Click to expand...

I think I need to get my head around it being a walkabout kit lens. It's an expensive kit lens at £750 UK spec.
 
When I did Skomer I took 24-120 on one body and 70-200 on the other ... ideal combination for what was to be seen :)
 
gramps said:
When I did Skomer I took 24-120 on one body and 70-200 on the other ... ideal combination for what was to be seen :)
Click to expand...

That was my thinking, only I won't have a second body. I'm also taking a macro and a 200-400 for flight shots. We will on the island there for 48 hours so plenty of time to use all four lenses to get some different images.

Gramps would it be possible for you to point me towards some of your puffin images with the 24-120? I can't find any on flickr at present.
 
Last edited:
Another happy 24-120 owner here. One went from a D750 kit in the classifieds here the other day for £460, unused. That's a lot of lens for the money.

Having used a friend's 24-70 before, I was struggling to see the £500+ price difference to be honest. VR is of way more use to me than 2.8 and I like the extra 50mm. Horses, courses etc...
 
Yup I am after a 24-120 too and missed 2 of these now so far. They don't come up often when they do they go quick. I've even had wanted thread up and no success

Did though about a 24-85 3.5-4.5
 
john_e said:
Another happy 24-120 owner here. One went from a D750 kit in the classifieds here the other day for £460, unused. That's a lot of lens for the money.

Having used a friend's 24-70 before, I was struggling to see the £500+ price difference to be honest. VR is of way more use to me than 2.8 and I like the extra 50mm. Horses, courses etc...
Click to expand...

I did see that one come up but it went quick like others have. I'm currently think the same as you, it could be a useful landscape lens too as it seems quite sharp across the frame.
 
I don't have any on Flickr, there will be a couple here: http://www.westcountryimages.co.uk/?page_id=800 but I can't identify which are from that lens ... I have others on an eternal USB drive but it's currently backing up, I might be able to add some in a bit :)
 
gramps said:
I don't have any on Flickr, there will be a couple here: http://www.westcountryimages.co.uk/?page_id=800 but I can't identify which are from that lens ... I have others on an eternal USB drive but it's currently backing up, I might be able to add some in a bit :)
Click to expand...
Thanks Gramps that'd would be great if you could. You have some nice images on your website.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Meant to be very good, hence why I've been looking for one too, not expecting it to quite match up to my Tamron 24-70 f2.8 but if its even close it will be a great travel lens.
Click to expand...

Looks like it is a popular lens, hence why it sells so fast on the classifieds. I've read these reviews (camera labs and photography life) and it comes up quite nice.
 
Im really enjoying the 24-120 I bought with the D750, great range and IS. In fact I've just been looking through Lightroom with the images I've taken with the 24-120 and am always surprised how sharp this lens is at F4.

You can't go wrong with either lens tbh.
 
The 24-70mm is over hyped and way too expensive, ive owned 3 and sold them all, really dont see what the fuss is about, my old Tamron 28-75mm and Tamron 24-135mm more than matched the IQ, slower AF of course but i dont need speed from a mid range zoom, now i dont need the f/2.8 so am happily using the sharper 24-85mm VR
 
Simon has raised a very good point! Make sure that the 24-120 is the newer f/4 version rather than the older variable aperture one which was a bit less good (quite a big bit less good, truth be told!)
 
I love my 24-120 F4, fantastic lens.

I currently pair it with an 85 1.8 and will look to add either the Sigma 35mm F1.4 of Nikon F1.8 for low light and shallow DOF.
 
It does sound like the 24-120 f4 is the one to go for and something I'm going to keep an eye out for. I can't believe they are going for only £323 if purchased with a d750 on Panamoz which is grey market. The downside is they are grey which is not a problem for some. The last few on here have gone for around £450 so it's something to think about if it is sold on after splitting from a d750 kit from panamoz.
 
I'm seriously thinking about this lens to use it as walk around or holiday shots. The 28-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 can stay at home or work lens.

I did think about the 28mm f1.8 but this lens sold me.
 
Just out of curiosity what do you deem the term 'walk around'? For times don't want a pro lens for work? Times out with the family without the bulk? Just a do it all to capture the moment?
 
Walkaround means the lens will be in my hands alot of times and shoot when something is interest or family stuff during vocation. My pro lens spend the time shooting instead of holding it.

Part of that is to do with the bulk and weight. This 24-120 f4 VR is light compare to the pro lens but the imagine quality is also fantastic.
 
badboy1984 said:
I'm seriously thinking about this lens to use it as walk around or holiday shots..
Click to expand...

This is what I take on my hols & if going out somewhere for the day with nothing specific in mind.

A great lens imho.
 
OldCarlos said:
This is what I take on my hols & if going out somewhere for the day with nothing specific in mind.

A great lens imho.
Click to expand...

Your definite right. If I have specific things in mind like going to shoot bird or air craft, sports ca race, then I would definite bring my 70-200 f2.8 out. If I know i will be shooting tons of landscape then my wide angle will do the trick and if i going to do tons of portrait then my 85mm f2.8 or 28-70 f2.8 will work nicely.

Going on holiday with nothing in mind or attending my nephew's birthday party i think this 24-120 f4 will be a good lens to use, the 50mm f1.8G will go well together for low light stuff.
 
I have the 24-120 f4 & it's an excellent holiday & walkabout lens. I do sometimes wish that I had got the 24-70mm f2.8 for the extra speed & quality. When the new PF (?) 24-70mm comes out, I will definitely get that, but still keep my 24-120mm as a holiday lens.
 
Orange Elephant said:
I have the 24-120 f4 & it's an excellent holiday & walkabout lens. I do sometimes wish that I had got the 24-70mm f2.8 for the extra speed & quality. When the new PF (?) 24-70mm comes out, I will definitely get that, but still keep my 24-120mm as a holiday lens.
Click to expand...

I'll be interested to compare the 24-120 with my Tamron, I don't think I can see it replacing the 24-70 which means it may even get moved on after my summer holiday because I'm not sure I can afford to keep one sitting in a bag long term!
 
The 24-120 f4 VR sells for around £470-500 on ebay shops. high street shops sells them for £750. Worth a shot on ebay?
 
I have received my 24-120 and am in two minds on whether to keep it or not. It is sat packaged staring at me! I have the Nikon 24-70 which on initial inspection has an easier focus ring for video as it has a wider ring and sits better with the body when used on a monopod. The Nikon 24-70 doesn't have the reach nor the VR which would be very handy for shoots without a monopod. I am tempted by parting with both and getting a Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 which I have heard are excellent for video as their focus ring is very good but means trying to source a good batch.
 
Last edited:
I got the Tamron 24/70 vc 2.8 for £650. Its a stunning lens. Does everything I need.. The ONLY downside is the horrible 84mm thread size so extra filters
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top