I was looking at the recent rebates on some of the Nikon lenses and was wondering if the 24-120 was worth the price after the big rebate. The lens seems to get mixed reviews and if you own it what are your thoughts?? I am mainly concerned about sharpness and AF. Thanks.
I've been considering it, but haven't pulled the pin. Would it be worth it for you? I don't know. Buy it and try it. You might be happy, you might not.
I had both the 24-70 and 24-120 side by side for 6 months and ended up selling the 24-70.
The 24-70 is better but the versatility of the 24-120 won.
At 24 there is some distortion and vignetting which are easily (automatically) corrected in LR.
At the long end it's getting a little bit softer, you need to stop down a little.
AF is a little slower, but not too much.
Agree with Chris above my 24-70G has been in the closet since I got the 24-120VR, it's about the versatility for my work. I can leave a hotel room or my home with D600/24-20VR in a smal bag and be fairly comfortable most of the day. It's not the best but it's good enough.
i had 24-120 f/4 vr, yes it was nice but i sold it because at 24mm distortion was terrible for me and i couldn't correct it on softwares like others and f/4 was not good sometimes now i have 24-70 and 70-200 and happier now, but it's a matter of budget actually buying and selling sometimes cost more so save money and buy 24-70 and 70-200, this is my experience of course.
The 24-85 VR is pretty much comparable, optically speaking, to the 24-120 at 1/3 the cost. So the 85-120 range is rather costly. That's why I can't wrap my brain around the 24-120, even at the rebated price.
Danner wrote:
The 24-85 VR is pretty much comparable, optically speaking, to the 24-120 at 1/3 the cost. So the 85-120 range is rather costly. That's why I can't wrap my brain around the 24-120, even at the rebated price.
then I think you do need to think about it more. it is the most usable range with reasonable speed and minimal "warts". allows most users to shoot with one lens in various scenarios. its all about what you can do with it.
I've had two and sold, primarily because I have always had the 24-70mm. Now I ordered another that will be here today. The price was too good to pass up. I want it for my D600 as I'd sold the kit lens, however now I'm not sure I'll keep the D600 as it's too redundant along with the D800e...
The 24-120mm versus 24-85mm. One is constant aperture and the other is variable. One has nanocoating and the other doesn't. One is 77mm filter size, the other is 72mm. In short, there are many differences if you do a side-by-side comparison. Those differences may or may not matter to you. IMO you get what you pay for. You have choices from the 24-85mm, 24-120mm, through 24-70mm: good, better, and best. None are bad.
My only complaint, which bugged me, was the "feel" of the lens is different from my 24-70mm.
I have both the 24-70 and the 24-120 and love them both. The 24-120 is in my humble opinion the best walk around lens, great range, sharp, light, constant aperature ...
Until I purchased this lens I carried the 24-70 along with the 70-200 2.8 everywhere. Now the 24-120 gets the walk around work
Just like with Canon and the 24-105 vs 24-70 debate, this discussion will go on forever. It should be enough of a clue that there IS a debate at all. If it were a crap lens, there'd be few supporters and many detractors.
BTW - I love mine. I also loved my 24-105 when I shot Canon. I must admit that I also like the 24-70 on both platforms, but for overall versatility, it's hard to beat the 24-120.
oh when I had canon I had the 24-105/4 and I thought then that it was a very good lens to use too. gave it a lot of use. and back then I too owned their 24-70/2.8
SSISteve wrote:
I was looking at the recent rebates on some of the Nikon lenses and was wondering if the 24-120 was worth the price after the big rebate. The lens seems to get mixed reviews and if you own it what are your thoughts?? I am mainly concerned about sharpness and AF. Thanks.
Steve
I don't own it, so maybe my thoughts are worthless. Regardless, when I was doing walk-around type shooting, I loved the old, much maligned, version of the 24-120. I don't do walk-around stuff any more, but I am still very tempted to buy this lens, especially now with the big rebate. For me, it's just a real nice FL range, with pretty good IQ. If you want the best IQ, the 24-70 is the ticket, which is what I generally use now.
If you're living on SSI, there's a lot of walk-around type stuff there, or at least there used to be. I used to do a lot of partying out there, in my younger, wilder days. It certainly has much better photo ops than in Brunswick, IMO.
Regardless, if you don't want the 24-70 or one of the truly super zooms, I'd think that the 24-120 f/4 would be a good alternative. If you find that you really don't like it, you shouldn't lose much money selling it.
