Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · 16-85 on DX vs 24-120 f4.0 on FX
  
 
lara_ckl
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 16-85 on DX vs 24-120 f4.0 on FX


How does the 24-120VR f4.0 (latest version) when used on 12 MP FX compares to the 16-85VR f3.5-5.6 when used on 12 MP DX?

I am asking because I absolutely love the photos produced by the 16-85 when used on my D90 and D300. Something about that lens just sings to me. The focal length is also just right for me.

Someone just sent me a D700. :-)

I am looking for a lens equivalent to the 16-85 for the D700. I know the 24-120 has the same angle of view. But is the IQ the same? I've read all the usual reviews, and most seems neutral (at best) when reviewing the 24-120 f4.0.

I am seeking opinions from people with experience using both.

Thanks.



Aug 28, 2012 at 10:04 PM
JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 16-85 on DX vs 24-120 f4.0 on FX


I love my 24-120mm on my D700 when I had the D700... I would say the IQ is better than the 16-85mm. But if you read at all, you will see lot's of pro's and con's to all of those lenses. The 24-120mm is the lens I use on my D800 also until I get out in the field to shoot Landscapes, where then I will switch over to the 16-35mm.

Get it, use it, love it....

Jim



Aug 28, 2012 at 10:23 PM
DonM2
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 16-85 on DX vs 24-120 f4.0 on FX


lara_ckl

Maybe not the total answer you need, but I have to tell you this:

I have not owned the 16-85 Nikkor. But I recently bought the new Nikkor 24-120 f/4 for better performance on new D800e than some of my other glass that work just fine on my D300, D700 and D3s.

The special beauty of the new 24-120 f/4:
1. VR stabilizing
2. Constant f/4 aperture
3. Starting with the D700 and onward, high ISO settings are so nice that f/4 handles my needs just fine, so far.

So, as the occasion demands, the 24-120 has become my 'walk around' zoom on whatever body.




Aug 28, 2012 at 10:43 PM
davidnholtjr
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 16-85 on DX vs 24-120 f4.0 on FX


The D700 and 24-120/4 VR are a great combo. Worth picking up.


Aug 29, 2012 at 04:43 PM
S Dilworth
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 16-85 on DX vs 24-120 f4.0 on FX


I had the 16-85 mm f/3.5-5.6 VR (sold in favour of eating one month), and it is indeed an attractive lens. To my mind, there isnít a perfect FX equivalent.

The 24-120 mm f/4 VR that you mention is perhaps your best bet, but itís much larger, more ambitious, and more expensive. At the long end itís twice as bright as the 16-85, plus it covers the FX frame which is over twice as big as DX. So it supplies over four times more light to the sensor, and to do that it has to be bigger. Much bigger. The 16-85 is 72 ◊ 85 mm and 485 g, while the 24-120 is 84 ◊ 103.5 mm and 710 g.

For this reason, you might also consider the new 24-85 mm f/3.5-4.5 VR. Itís a lower zoom range, but in size (78 ◊ 82 mm, 465 g) and price itís a closer equivalent to the 16-85.



Aug 30, 2012 at 07:47 AM





FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password