gear-nut Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
Re the Z 24mm to whatever zooms, I’ve owned them all. The 2.8 is marginally better than the f4 at f4; not significantly so at the 24 end but more notable at 70. At f5.6 there isn’t much between them other than size and weight, they are both excellent. So if you shoot regularly in the f2.8-4.5 range, the 2.8 is the winner.
From there, the 24-120 is about equal to the 24-70/4, but perhaps a hair better at 24 wide open. Again by f5.6, not much between them other than length.
The 24-200 is remarkably good in the same 24-120 range, but a hair behind the 24-120 overall and optically slower. After 120 the IQ wanes a bit but still quite good, albeit slow optically.
I think Ricci has a good comparison if folks need to compare performance at 200%.
PS: I personally decided on the 24-120 for its versatility. If I need faster optically, I mount a prime. But I would not hesitate buying another 24-70/2.8 —adding it, not replacing anything— if I found myself needing faster optics and flexibility over that range — but as of yet, that hasn’t happened…
|