NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: BruceSD on September 10, 2024, 06:58:55
-
.
I currently own a Nikon Z6 and Z7 camera. I mostly shoot Nikkor F mount, and Zeiss Milvus F mount prime lenses on these two cameras (with adapters of course).
I own no Nikkor zoom lenses that are designed specifically for Nikon Z mount full frame bodies.
I'd like to purchase a standard zoom lens that has a Z mount. I have done some research, and I am considering purchasing the Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 S lens in Z mount. If any of you own this lens, I would love to hear what you like and what you dislike about this lens.
If there are any other zoom lenses (even third party ones) that you also like, please feel free to tell me about them too.
Oh, almost forgot - my budget is $1,000 USD.
Thank you
-
I own and happily use the 24-70mm f4. Compact, light and very sharp. Mint second hand can be found for less than half your budget. All reports indicate that the 24-120 is similar in quality but with added extra reach. Someone here may confirm it.
-
Bruce!
I am a happy owner of the Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 S lens. It sits on a Z8 and a Z7. The lens is versatile, sharp and has a nice out of focus character. The Z8 for the fast focus situations with grandchildren. You cannot go wrong with this lens.
But I might look into an iPhone 16 pro. Lighter, cheaper and a greater zoom range in the wide area. A complement camera, perhaps.
How far your budget takes you depends on where you live.
/Eric
-
For me it's the 24-120/4 S
Jack of all trades. Very sharp through the range (a little less at the end).
-
I own the Z 24-120 since I own a Z camera. It is the most used zoom lens on my Z7II. It has seen dust, rain and a lot of bumbs in trains and busses.
The range gives you most, what you need during the day. The additional programmable ring makes it easy to modify exposure.
You still can carry it with the camera on a strap, hanging on a side under your arm.
A choice I would make again in the sense to have my complete "light" travel kit: Z 14-30 4.0, Z 24-120 4.0 and Tamron Z 70-300.
An alternative imo would be the new Tamron Z 35-150mm 2.0-2.8. All the reviews I´ve seen so far are superb, but it is bigger and doesn´t go wider than 35mm, but here with aperture 2.
No idea what Z8/9 are doing, my AF with the 24-120 in my Z7II is not as fast as f.e. FTZ with 1.4 58 or the Z 2.0 40mm. It might have to do with the inside mass of the lens, but I think it has as well to do with the light coming to the sensor. In the evenings and under bad light conditions camera and lens are not, what i would call a reliable team to get a fast shot under any circumstances. Here my 1.4 58 lens shines in speed (as well as in the result)
As an addition to your primes I recomment it, but test the Tamron as well, if you have a chance.
-
.
Thank you everyone. Great responses!
I'm now going to start looking for a nice used copy of the Z 24-120 lens for myself.
-
Bruce, for the last approx 20 years I only used primes as I didn't like the results and haptics of zooms. The Z 24-120 S is the first lens which changed my view. I use it on the Z8 and a bit less on the Zf.
-
I own and happily use the 24-70mm f4. Compact, light and very sharp. .... All reports indicate that the 24-120 is similar in quality but with added extra reach. Someone here may confirm it.
Same here, but I've considered getting the Z 24-120 instead of my Z 24-70/4. Any opinions/experiences appreciated.
-
I am the prime guy as you know. I bought into the Z system to mount the 1.2/50S although I have to confess I did not use it much since I own the Zf with the 1.0/50 Voigtlander.
Yet. If I want to travel light weight and low key and camouflage as an amateur I really love the 4/24-70S ... superb quality through the range, was dirt cheap as a bundle with my Z6 and is very reliable.
-
Same here, but I've considered getting the Z 24-120 instead of my Z 24-70/4. Any opinions/experiences appreciated.
The 24-120 is just a little better in the same range. But a lot better at 71-120 ;D
I had the 24-70 before the 24-120. Sold the first on after a couple of months.
Ricci did a test between the two lenses.
-
+1
Having personally owned both of these two lenses, I would agree with Chris's assessment.
On the other hand, if budget is an issue, the 24-70mm lens can be affordably picked up second hand and it is still a very good lens. Both are Nikon Z "S" type lenses.
*****
I also have the 14-30mm f/4 lens which I am still coming to terms with, but it is a keeper and I doubt if I can justify a faster wide angle zoom at this time.
The 24-120 is just a little better in the same range. But a lot better at 71-120 ;D
I had the 24-70 before the 24-120. Sold the first on after a couple of months.
Ricci did a test between the two lenses.......................................
-
+1 about the 24-120.
I must confess I also find the 40/2 extremely useful, plus it is cheap and small. I once shot a whole graduation party with that lens (on the Zf), B&W rendition and electronic zooming (actually, re-framing in PP) and got lovely results. Bokeh is slightly nervous but pretty too.
Since I bought the 40/2, I seldom use the 50/1.8 despite its superior quality. Its size is an issue, esp. when doing street shots.
I also enjoy the Voigtländer 50/1.0, quite an allrounder with a monstrous IQ wide open.
-
My 24-70/4 apparently is on a permanent loan .... frankly, although it was a very good 'kit' zoom lens, I don't miss it that much.
The 40/2 mentioned above (I own the SE version) sees a lot of use either on my Z5 for IR, in which it really excels, or for the Zf or Z fc for pleasure shooting. The 50/1.8 has better image quality, but at the same time can be perceived as simply too perfect for my liking.
Due to the size of the S-Line optics, I doubt whether I'll get any new zoom lens from that range.
I do shoot with zoom lenses on the smaller DX Z cameras, i.e. Z30 or Z fc. Either the 16-50 or the 12-28. Both are featherweights and surprisingly good in output quality terms. They also share the common trait of a slightly nervous bokeh, the 12-28 being the least nervous of them.
-
since getting the 24-120 nearly a year ago, I use that much of the time. I prefer both rendering and sharpness to the 24-70 which went in part-exchange.
-
I like the 16-50 on my Z50 very much. The lens I almost always use on the body. I also like the 18-28.
For a wedding I got an used 24-70/4S at a very reasonable price. The same time I had a even lower bid on a brand new 24-70/4S which I won. It was a kit-lens so it came in its while box. It is quite expensive as a stand-alone lens in its black box! ......interesting people sell those that cheap just because it is a kit lens.
The 24-70/4S is very very good. An example attached with two 100% crops (shot with the used lens). Maybe the brand new lens is even better!
-
Happy owner of 24-70 f4 z lens also considering the 24-120 f4 :)
I use to shoot at f4 and 24-70 has a limited separation at 50 or 70 compared to my 40 f2, so I think 24-120 will have a more prime like separation for portraits on 85, 105 or 120 f4
Of coarse I do have 50 and 85 1.8G for that mater but I never cary them ;D
24-120 will be a good company to the new to me 180-600 as a only two lens walk around (birding) set 8)
-
the Z 24-120 f/4 convinced me to go Z with FX. Lots of IQ for the 24-120 Z7II combo at just 90 grams more than the very good AFS 16-80 f/2.8-4 G D7200 combo. The same range of view angles, the 5x normal zoom range. The 24-120 adds closeup capability to 0.39x closeup magnification at 120mm, making it a very complete walk around combo. I find it matches well with the Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 S lens as a 2 lens travel combo. The 100-400 combines 4x zoom versatility with relatively light weight for a long lens. With a crop to 12 Mpix on the Z7II one gets close to 800mm FX equivalent view. It has 0.38x magnification capability with good working distance.The 77mm filter diameter is used by both lenses, a bonus when a pol or ND filter may be used.
-
I have the Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Lens and the Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/4 S kit Lens
I continue to be impressed by the sharpness, lightness, and general useability of the kit Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/4 S lens. The f/2.8 version is often just too heavy for me to take with me.
-
The 24-120 also has a reproduction ratio of about 1:3. If Canon labels their 1:3 as "macro", then Nikon can get away with calling this a micro-nikkor too.
(Sarcasm of course).
I cannot emphasise how useful 1:3 is for travel. You can go from that nice building to close-ups of your food. If anyone wants just one lens, the 24-120 is it.
-
I'm no longer a heavy user of zoom lenses, in particular with the Z system. Thus the "kit" lens 24-70/4 S is on permanent leave to a friend. However, the Nikkor 70-180/2.8, whilst no S-Line design, has a lot going for it. It also combines well with the TC 14Z and in this case goes nearly to life-size. Putting a tripod collar on it helps for close-up work, too. And did I mention it works very well for IR?
-
I only got one 24-70 f/4 and it is a good lens, if you have enough light or you are ready to throw away a lot of files and crank up ISO (Z6 ISO 32.000) like here:
-
I only got one 24-70 f/4 and it is a good lens, if you have enough light or you are ready to throw away a lot of files and crank up ISO (Z6 ISO 32.000) like here:
I recently acquired one too. Adobe's Denoise AI helps considerably to make up for higher ISOs when needed.
-
Have the zfc kit that came with the 16-50mm f/3.5-6.3 thats the only z zoomer i currently have
-
I started out with the Z24-70/4, which is very high performing, optically speaking. But it felt weird to have an f/4 maximum aperture in the normal focal length range, so I returned it and got a Z24-70/2.8, which is very nice. The Z14-24 is also very good, but the Z24-70 is very, very good (for my purposes).