Nikon 24-70 to 24-120

Rocket

CTID
Messages
2,974
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
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
5,962
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
Yes
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
5,255
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
Is there much of a weight saving? How about a 24-85? That weighs next to nowt compared to a 24-70.
 
Messages
35,781
Edit My Images
No
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
5,946
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
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
35,281
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
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
1,396
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
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
2,817
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
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
8,659
Name
wayne clarke
Edit My Images
Yes
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
906
Name
Doug
Edit My Images
Yes
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
35,281
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
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
16,988
Edit My Images
No
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
Rocket

Rocket

CTID
Messages
2,974
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
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
26
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
I just ordered the Z6 with 24-70 lens, why not save up some more cash first and then go for this?
 
Messages
1,059
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
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
5,107
Name
Andrea
Edit My Images
Yes
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
3,661
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
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
906
Name
Doug
Edit My Images
Yes
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
 
Messages
27
Name
Geoff Blackmore
Edit My Images
Yes
At the moment I am going through the GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) phase. My trustee old 35 -70 f2.8 D lens has developed AF issues but then it is close to 30 years old, it is behaving better on my D750 than it does on my older cameras but is still playing up. So I have read this thread and am torn, I mainly shoot in the evenings after work, with the occasional Saturday or Sunday day shoot when the family commitments allow. I am into nightscapes on the Water and Landscapes with a bit of Wildlife and Architectural stuff occasionally. Any pointers would be great.
 
Messages
16,988
Edit My Images
No
At the moment I am going through the GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) phase. My trustee old 35 -70 f2.8 D lens has developed AF issues but then it is close to 30 years old, it is behaving better on my D750 than it does on my older cameras but is still playing up. So I have read this thread and am torn, I mainly shoot in the evenings after work, with the occasional Saturday or Sunday day shoot when the family commitments allow. I am into nightscapes on the Water and Landscapes with a bit of Wildlife and Architectural stuff occasionally. Any pointers would be great.
Both the 24-120mm f4 and 24-70mm f2.8 are both great lenses and have their own strengths. In terms of sharpness there's not that much to choose between them, at least with the copies that I had. The AF speed of the f2.8 is noticeably faster, and OOF areas render nicer imo, but of course it lacks reach. It's also heavier.
 
Messages
7,597
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
I've got the 24-70mm and to be honest I don't often go lower than f/4 as that little bit extra depth of field can make all the difference with a fast moving subject. As for losing a stop, I reckon the D700 is more than capable of dealing with that.

But if weight really is an issue then depending on your photography needs I find a change to a smaller CSC system such as the Sony A6xxx made a huge difference, especially with the footprint as well. But the crop and AF may feel like a step down?

EDIT: I forgot to add that with regard to the 24-120mm the extra reach could be handy where you can't really move in closer, such as for me today when I went to take a quick grab shot of a cheeky grey squirrel who was having fun with the children, I wished I had a little extra reach because as I moved closer the wee fella darted behind the tree. My crop isn't as close as I wanted, but this is as far as I would want to go.

Here's the original and then crop at 70mm (at f/2.8 lol). What do you reckon, would 120mm have made all the difference to get a closer crop?

Grey Squirrel Original.jpg

Grey Squirrel Cropped.jpg
 
Last edited:
Messages
27
Name
Geoff Blackmore
Edit My Images
Yes
First Shots with my D750 taken using my trusty 80-200 F2.8 DSC_0053 (2).jpg
 
Messages
2,817
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
I have both the 24-70 and 24-120 haven’t really used the former since I got the latter. The 24-70 really is a lump of a lens, but I used it for the first time in about 2 years yesterday and forgot just how good the image quality it gives. The versatility, VR and relative lightness of the 24-120 do give it an edge though.
 
Top