I have sold a lot of these lenses here on FM and out in the real world by way of my unceasing proselytization, and have finally put my 3+ years of experiences into a review.
I think you'll find a lot of folks on FM that will agree that this is the "swiss army knife" of zooms for Z, but in case you're one of the few that somehow doesn't have one yet, and needs a little push...
Scott, thank you for the review,
You confirmed my choice for recently purchasing this lens for my Z8
I am enjoying the versatility of the z 24-120 like I did with my F 24-120
But the Z lens seems to be sharper
Lefty38 wrote:
Scott, thank you for the review,
You confirmed my choice for recently purchasing this lens for my Z8
I am enjoying the versatility of the z 24-120 like I did with my F 24-120
But the Z lens seems to be sharper
Yes, the Z is a substantial improvement over the quite good F. The F is more in the "kit lens" territory, where the Z is firmly an S lens.
RoamingScott wrote:
I have sold a lot of these lenses here on FM and out in the real world by way of my unceasing proselytization, and have finally put my 3+ years of experiences into a review.
I think you'll find a lot of folks on FM that will agree that this is the "swiss army knife" of zooms for Z, but in case you're one of the few that somehow doesn't have one yet, and needs a little push...
Wow!
Awesome video full of very useful information.
I am glad I ordered this Swiss Army Knife last night
Thank you from one Texan to another!
Nice review. I agree that it is the best of the mid-zooms, and I have used all of them. I have the Tamron 28-75 G II for the Sony and the Z 24-120 for the Nikon system and the 24-120 is better and wildly more versatile. Way better than the Sony or Canon 24-105's. I especially agree with your comments about its macro lite capabilities. I always carry a Z 105 macro with me along with this lens at botanical gardens and rarely bother to put the 105 on the camera.
billsnature wrote:
Nice review. I agree that it is the best of the mid-zooms, and I have used all of them. I have the Tamron 28-75 G II for the Sony and the Z 24-120 for the Nikon system and the 24-120 is better and wildly more versatile. Way better than the Sony or Canon 24-105's. I especially agree with your comments about its macro lite capabilities. I always carry a Z 105 macro with me along with this lens at botanical gardens and rarely bother to put the 105 on the camera.
Thanks Bill. The macro-lite ability of both this and the 100-400 are what really set them apart to me in terms of being the "everything" lenses in their respective focal length ranges.
This is the lens that started the Z-mount avalanche for me.
I didn't own an F-mount zoom that could resolve the Z8 sensor properly, so I bit the bullet and bought the 24-120mm after reviewing some RAW files from the sample DPreview gallery. Although at the time I kept seeing it referred to as a "kit" lens, after post-processing the sample RAW files, I couldn't understand what more anyone could want in a zoom! The details and color were great!
Once it was in my hands and I started using it, I was blown away by how sharp it was, even at semi-macro level. If a "kit" lens could be THIS good, what am I missing in the rest of the Z-mount line-up?!? So then I went for the Z 50mm f/1.8 S (mind blown), and that led to the Z 20mm (wow!), and the Z 35mm f/1.8S (very nice!), and the Z MC 105mm f/2.8 (wooowww),....
Long story short, the Z 24-120mm is pretty amazing! I took a road trip across multiple national parks and I wasn't expecting to use the 24-120 as much as I did, but it was attached to the Z8 most of the time. The other lenses were more specialized and therefore didn't get as much use as I planned for them.
The only "gripe" that some might have with it is the bit of distortion and vignetting, if left uncorrected. There's that small price to pay for all the benefits, but even that becomes a non-issue if lens correction is applied in-camera, or in your favorite PP software. The purists might have this to nitpick.
SoaringSprite wrote:
This is the lens that started the Z-mount avalanche for me.
Yep, same. I bought a Z7ii and waited for this lens to launch 4 years ago, knowing it would likely blow the socks off my Sony 24-105mm. At the time, people were incredulous that I'd switch for a single lens, but I'm fairly prescient that way
I definitely underestimated the benefits of the Z-mount prior to buying the Z8 and I can completely understand why someone would want to switch just for the lenses alone. I mean,... you hear this said a LOT when people seek advice on whether they should upgrade their camera body, or lenses; "The lens is the most important part!"
I'm glad I went Nikon mirrorless, just to have access to all this great glass.
I'm so tempted by this lens. It's been my standard zoom focal length with other systems I've owned. What's holding me back is that I'd use it on a Zf. I like when the camera / lens combination is balanced and in this case, I feel it to be weighted a little more in favor of the lens.
My perfect balance of camera / lens is the Fujifilm X-H2 and the 16-80mm. They just seem made for each other.
LeonD60 wrote:
I'm so tempted by this lens. It's been my standard zoom focal length with other systems I've owned. What's holding me back is that I'd use it on a Zf. I like when the camera / lens combination is balanced and in this case, I feel it to be weighted a little more in favor of the lens.
My perfect balance of camera / lens is the Fujifilm X-H2 and the 16-80mm. They just seem made for each other.
It feels just fine on the ZF when using a grip like the SmallRig. I'm sure the base plate there adds a little weight back to the camera side too. I'd enjoy it far less without a grip to be sure. The lens is more than 100g lighter than the camera with the SmallRig on.
It did surprise me also.
I mostly shoot motocross and my dog.
And most off the time its the 24-120 on the camera, even more then the 70-200.
just one thing, when filming the zoom is to stiff.
its makes that i move the camera in thrusting movements.
so i am saving for the 28-135pz, but the 24-120 is a keeper.
sport wrote:
It did surprise me also.
I mostly shoot motocross and my dog.
And most off the time its the 24-120 on the camera, even more then the 70-200.
just one thing, when filming the zoom is to stiff.
its makes that i move the camera in thrusting movements.
so i am saving for the 28-135pz, but the 24-120 is a keeper.
Not sure which cam you have, but the digital pz feature is great if you have it.
This lens was on my want list and the first lens I bought when I finally bought a Z mount camera.
It is most used one and it forces me to really have a reason or need to use a different lens.
