p.1 #1 · 24-120f/4 vs Tamron 35-100 f/2.8 - help me choose
planning new Z5ii (or probably Z5iiC). This is TBD.
Long time D90 shooter, but stopped due to family constraints, too much time it took me to post process shots and possibly heavy camera gear. looking for a nice /tight setup.
Goal is mostly to shoot family portraits, casual shots during trips & create memories with nice shots right out of camera.
I don't envision doing landscapes like I used to and spend time for post processing. I honestly don't have bandwidth for that. All I'm looking for is some simple shots as our family ventures into global destinations every few months.
p.1 #8 · 24-120f/4 vs Tamron 35-100 f/2.8 - help me choose
The 26mm in the second kit seems like it's just there for "focal length insurance" and not as a standalone, compact lens to use *instead* of the zoom. If that's the case ditch it and consider the 40mm for both kits.
As pointed out the 35-100mm f2.8 is a bit lighter than the 24-120mm f4, but the difference is tiny. In practical terms both lenses are about the same size and weight (and both are substantial btw, I would not want to pair them with the Z5IIC..): https://camerasize.com/compact/#946.1027,946.1246,ha,t
I think you'll need to ask yourself two questions:
1) how worried are you about not having wide-angle coverage below 35mm in the zoom?
2) do you want f2.8 at 35mm and 50mm? (I'd argue it becomes less relevant at 85-100mm as you get nice background blur at f4 too)
Lastly, as you don't want to edit images, I think both zooms will be just fine but you should spend some time looking into Custom Picture Profiles and ADL settings. Otherwise a lot of the potential of the kit will get lost.
Personally, I think the best cameras for straight out of camera JPGs are currently the Panasonic bodies (S5II or S9 for something in the Z5II class) as Real Time LUTs - with V-Log as a starting point - are much more powerful than what Nikon allows with Flexible Color / Custom Picture Profiles.
p.1 #9 · 24-120f/4 vs Tamron 35-100 f/2.8 - help me choose
Flip a coin and if you’re disappointed with the result, then you know which lens you actually want.
Or be logical: do you shoot people often? Maybe the faster lens. Do you hike and take landscape shots? Maybe the Nikon with the greater range.
Personally, I couldn’t bring myself to buy either when there were so many juicy prime options available. Especially when the Z5IIC is so compact, I’d suggest a collection of compact primes. The 40/2 is lovely to shoot with on my Z5II, and I expect the 28/2.8 would be similar. Maybe add an 85/1.8 S (I actually went for the Voigtländer 75/1.5) for a short telephoto or something like the Tamron 70-180/2.8 G2 just to keep in the bag if you think you might want something longer?
I shot with mostly just the 40/2 in the first few months of owning the Z5II, as it’s my first camera from Nikon, and found it quite capable of useful shots in most situations if you’re willing to work with what the focal length gives you.
p.1 #11 · 24-120f/4 vs Tamron 35-100 f/2.8 - help me choose
Ryzbor wrote:
You'd be better off with a Sony A7CII with this Tamron or the 25-200 or a Sigma 20-200 and maybe a modern Chinese portrait prime.
The bulk comes mostly from the lenses, a smaller camera doesn't really help much.
If bulk would be the main concern the overall better choice would be an APS-C or MFT camera with significantly smaller lenses (at the cost of total light gathering and depth of field potential).
p.1 #13 · 24-120f/4 vs Tamron 35-100 f/2.8 - help me choose
Ryzbor wrote:
Except it does not/depends. Nikon glass, including the 24-120, is bigger and heavier than the competition.
Tamron, Sigma and Sony started developing modern FF glass that is compact and lightweight... and not available for Nikon Z.
The FF Tamron 25-200 and FF Sigma 20-200 are roughly equal or even smaller than the APSC Tamron 17-70.
Both Canon and Nikon can't/don't care to develop a camera similar to the Sony A7CII (compact stabilized FF, full sized battery and viewfinder).
APSC with proper lenses can be a good alternative.
If we return to the original poster’s question, he has already been shooting APSC and now appears to be interested in full frame. He also doesn’t notably prioritise weight or size, unless that is what is meant by ‘tight’.
I am not disputing the compact merits of the cameras and lenses you mention.
They are all very similar in terms of size and weight, you'd never notice the 50g difference between the Nikon and the Tamron for example.
And if you put such a big ass lens on a camera it doesn't really matter whether the camera is a little smaller or not, it is a bulky kit either way.
APS-C lenses can be smaller, but not all of them are, and the Tamron 17-70mm is particularly big and heavy. For a really compact kit you'd have to go to something like a Fuji X-T50 + 16-80mm or 16-50mm lens, or the new PEN + 12-60mm, and you'd have a 700-800g kit that is less bulky overall and offers direct access to color profiles: https://camerasize.com/compact/#946.1027,946.1246,932.853,968.625,ha,t
But if the TO is fine with the 24-120mm f4 / 35-100mm f2.8 class of lens, then the Z5II is a good match.
Instead of pairing a standard zoom lens with a mediocre prime lens whose focal length is already within the zoom range, it might be better to use a smaller, lighter 24-70 (which already offers plenty of versatility) and pair it with a prime lens that has a longer focal length. There are plenty of options here—from the 105/2.8 MC (yes, it’s not small, but it’s a 1:1 macro) to the Viltrox 85/2 EVO, depending on your shooting needs. Or even a 135/1.8 Plena, which lets you do things you can only dream of with the 24-120/4… but that’s in a whole different price range.
p.1 #16 · 24-120f/4 vs Tamron 35-100 f/2.8 - help me choose
The difference in weight and bulk is not a big deal. When I travel, the 24-120mm f/4 S is the one lens I make sure I have! The 24-120mm has provided me some outstanding photos in my travels!
One travel recommendation is a sling strap rather than the standard neck strap. The camera stays by your side, use your hand to keep it there. I did a lot of event work and carried a 70-200mm f/2.8 S around for several hours with no problem.
The other nice thing about the 24-120mm f/4 S is that it's weather sealed for Nikon Z cameras.
p.1 #18 · 24-120f/4 vs Tamron 35-100 f/2.8 - help me choose
Masterguy wrote:
planning new Z5ii (or probably Z5iiC). This is TBD.
Long time D90 shooter, but stopped due to family constraints, too much time it took me to post process shots and possibly heavy camera gear. looking for a nice /tight setup.
Goal is mostly to shoot family portraits, casual shots during trips & create memories with nice shots right out of camera.
I don't envision doing landscapes like I used to and spend time for post processing. I honestly don't have bandwidth for that. All I'm looking for is some simple shots as our family ventures into global destinations every few months....Show more →
I'm going to be 'that guy.'
I enjoy bringing a camera. I enjoy the process of taking photos, exploring lenses, using zooms to work on framing, and post processing the images after. But that's me. I realized a couple years ago that once you are carrying a camera, no matter how compact, you are still futzing with a camera. You still have to deal with the thing around your neck,, or when you sit down at a restaurant, or on a public transport, or buying tickets for your kids - you're still a guy with a piece of equipment (and probably an extra lens, extra battery, spare card . . .).
Yeah, size matters. Full frame with its attendant lenses tend to be more bulky and you can compact things down with APS-C (Z50II is a gem of a camera though I'm not fond of the 16-50 and the lack of IBIS is problematic for these 74y.o. hands- or the Fuji X-E5 is really about a compact as you can go and produces nicely detail-rich files) that you can slip more easily into a sling or compact bag that doesn't scream CAMERA BAG HERE so much.
The Sony RX100Vii is, in my experience, the only real pocketable camera that produces more than good-enough files with a nice range of focal lengths. But it is pricey (these days) and sometimes hard to find.
But really, if the goal is family portraits/quick shots of the kids/spouse with SOC ease, use your phone (or upgrade your phone to a recent model) and learn to use it effectively. It's going to do 99% of what you mention; it's always available; it's easy to share with In-laws and GP's, produces reasonable size prints, and is really good for displaying on digital devices (which is how most family photos are shared these days). The last time I upgraded, my wife asked me why I wanted a new phone, and I told her I didn't want a new phone; I wanted a new camera and the phone just happened to be attached to it.
