Nikon 24-70 to 24-120

Messages
2,896
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
As age creeps in, I have started using my monopod to help, equipment is getting a weight issue to use. I am wondering if its worth changing fittings to my D700, changing my Nik 24-70 to a Nik 24-120 to lighten the load a little.
Any thoughts ?
 
Messages
5,372
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
Yes
#2
As age creeps in, I have started using my monopod to help, equipment is getting a weight issue to use. I am wondering if its worth changing fittings to my D700, changing my Nik 24-70 to a Nik 24-120 to lighten the load a little.
Any thoughts ?
I’d have thought that changing to a smaller format with dedicated lenses would see more of a significant weight saving.
When i need to travel light I use a Fuji X100. 35mm equivalence is my favourite focal length.
 
Messages
4,575
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
#3
Is there much of a weight saving? How about a 24-85? That weighs next to nowt compared to a 24-70.
 
Messages
33,478
Edit My Images
No
#4
I moved from 24-70 to 24-120 and found it both easier and more useful at the time, the 24-120 is a very economical walkabout lens.
 
Messages
5,164
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
As age creeps in, I have started using my monopod to help, equipment is getting a weight issue to use. I am wondering if its worth changing fittings to my D700, changing my Nik 24-70 to a Nik 24-120 to lighten the load a little.
Any thoughts ?
That change would theoretically save 190g (if you weigh a lens they usually don’t weigh that amount unless you don’t include hoods, lens caps, tripod foots etc. Nikon’s official weight stats are:

Nikon 24-70 G 900g
Nikon 24-120 710g

Maybe the VR in the 24-120 may help you not needing the monopod so that would save a bit more if you don’t that that.

Generally swapping to f2.8 to f4 lenses should save some weight. Another point you could save some weight is in the camera. The D700 weighs around 1kg so dropping to smaller body like a D600/610/750 would save around 200g.

Trying to save weight in this way isn’t great. You can make some savings, it’s just whether it’s really worth it.
 

Nod

Krispy and Kremey
Messages
32,394
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
If you can live with the stop difference between them, go for it! Make sure you go for the f/4 version of the 24-120 rather than the older variable aperture one (which was pretty crap in comparison.)
 
Messages
1,191
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
#8
24-120 is no pauper compared to the 24-70 optically. I bought my (f4) not long after they were introduced as the 24-70 was just a little too expensive for me having bought a D3, and the old f3.5-5.6 was basically given an 'avoid' tag. Reviews of 24-120 f4 have been good or better. It is is an extremely convenient lens and as far as I am concerned can do the job of 2 lenses on the D810. The 24-70 non-VR itch has been scratched, so I have both lenses. Fabulous the 24-70 is, the 24-120 ticks so many boxes (lightness, VR, 70-120, price).

Can't comment on the 24-85 variant, but I was looking at the 'D' models when I bought the 24-120.
 
Messages
2,713
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
#9
I’ve got both and tend to use the 24-140 more. Unless you are a dedicated pixel peeper, the image quality isn’t much different and the lens is generally less bulky. The VR and extra focal length are very useful.
I had the current 24-85 VR until I damaged it and it wasn’t worth repairing. It’s a pretty good lens, noticeably lighter and more compact than the other two and image quality is pretty good too. But I could afford to upgrade to a used 24-140 rather than another 24-85.
 
Messages
8,252
Name
wayne clarke
Edit My Images
Yes
#10
I had the chance to play with I think the D3300, I was quite supprised by the quality and light weight, and it was supprisingly good in low light too. If I was a nikon shooter I'd have been out shopping for one.
To be honest I've been looking at lighter kit myself (canon) and unless your printing really big I'm not sure you'll see much difference these days
 
Messages
861
Name
Doug
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
I'm actually considering going in the other direction!

I've got a lovely example of the 24-120 but have not scratched the 24-70 'itch'. The 24-120 is a great all rounder from what I have seen with it attached to my D600.

Couple favourites from it:

Running through Buttercups
by Doug, on Flickr

Barrika Sunset
by Doug, on Flickr
 

Nod

Krispy and Kremey
Messages
32,394
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
Doug, if I was you, I'd rent a 24-70 for a few days before disposing of the 24-120. Yes, ultimate image quality is slightly better but it drops off completely at 70mm! The extra weight can be an issue as well.
 
Messages
14,210
Edit My Images
No
#16
I had the 24-120mm f4 and rated it, compared to the 24-70mm f2.8 I have now there's not a lot in it optically in terms of sharpness imo. The reason I swapped to the 24-70mm was due to AF speed and light gathering, otherwise I'd have more than happily stuck with the 24-120mm. The only thing that bugged me with the 24-120mm was lens creep.
 
OP
OP
Rocket
Messages
2,896
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
#17
Thanks all for the detailed replies, something to chew on for a while. I would like to go for a D750 with 24-120 which might well suit me better in all areas. I may trip off to WEX and have a feel, Possible the best way to find out more and get the feel, although it is helpful to get some detailed feedback here.
I had considered the D500 but I do like full frame, but not writing it off. The Z6 and Z7 are out of my price range..
I recently purchased a second had Sony CX6000 with 16-50 lens, its decent, at the moment its just used for those snap shots.
Just not ready to drop out of the Nikon range as yet.

All the best.
 
Messages
1,019
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
#19
Thanks all for the detailed replies, something to chew on for a while. I would like to go for a D750 with 24-120 which might well suit me better in all areas. I may trip off to WEX and have a feel, Possible the best way to find out more and get the feel, although it is helpful to get some detailed feedback here.
I had considered the D500 but I do like full frame, but not writing it off. The Z6 and Z7 are out of my price range..
I recently purchased a second had Sony CX6000 with 16-50 lens, its decent, at the moment its just used for those snap shots.
Just not ready to drop out of the Nikon range as yet.

All the best.
I have a D750 and both a 24-70/f2.8 (Tamron) and a 24-120/f4. To be honest, the 24-120 is seeing a lot more action then the 24-70. It's such a great all rounder lens and with the high ISO ability of the D750 you just can't lose. And if I take the grip off the combination is quite light weight.
 
Messages
4,708
Name
Andrea
Edit My Images
Yes
#20
I have a D750 and both a 24-70/f2.8 (Tamron) and a 24-120/f4. To be honest, the 24-120 is seeing a lot more action then the 24-70. It's such a great all rounder lens and with the high ISO ability of the D750 you just can't lose. And if I take the grip off the combination is quite light weight.
I am/was the same. I had the 24-70/f2.8 already and got the 24-120/f4 in a kit with my D750. Thought it might be a handy holiday/walkaround lens and if not I would sell it, but it actually ended up being more used than the 24-70/f2.8. It's a useful focal length range and a god quality lens.
 
Messages
3,513
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
#21
As age creeps in, I have started using my monopod to help, equipment is getting a weight issue to use. I am wondering if its worth changing fittings to my D700, changing my Nik 24-70 to a Nik 24-120 to lighten the load a little.
Any thoughts ?
I have put a trade post in the forums if you are still considering this? I am looking to get a 24-70 so looking to trade my 24-120 plus cash for a 24-70
 
Messages
861
Name
Doug
Edit My Images
Yes
#22
Well...I took the plunge and got the Tamron 24-70 G2 based on the strength of the reviews. My 24-120 is up for sale in the Nikon section. Time will tell if it was a good idea! :D
 
Top