Lens advice for a Nikon Z8 please...

[David H. Hartman]

Lens advice for a Nikon Z8 please...

In the basket at B&H I have a NIKKOR Z 24-120mm f/4 S Lens but I'm getting cold feet. Mostly I don't like the construction, the dual telescoping barrel when zoomed. According to photographylife.com it's an excellent lens in many ways but they say the bokeh is a bit busy and note the way it extends when zoomed makes it vulnerable to bumps.

I've got a AF-D 35-70mm f/2.8 that has a decentering problem such that it needs to be stopped down to f/5.6~f/6.3 for good results. I don't need that issue again. Rather than have that lens repaired I bought a AF-D 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 which I've been quite happy with but it doesn't AF on the Z8.

What I should have done is bought the Nikon Z 8 kitted with a Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/4 S but I didn't. The cost when kitted with a Z8 would have been about $600.00 USD. New from B&H it's something like $1,096.00. At keh.com this lens sells used for around $500.00. According to photographylife.com this lens isn't quite as good as the 24-120/4.0 S but it's still a very nice lens.

Another lens on my list is the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S Macro. I already have the older AF-S Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR which I consider a pretty good lens with a few optical faults that make it less desirable to other 105mm Micro-Nikkors that I own. It offers VR which is good but it's a honker. I also find its resale estimated by keh.com is pretty low. I'm considering buying the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S Macro.

Do any of you read photographlife.com's reviews? Are they reliable?

Are there any mid-range zooms in the $1,000.00 range I've missed? Probably so.

If you will please help a fool spend his money.

Thanks!

Dave

[pluton]

I owned a Z 24-70/4 S for a week.  At the time I had only a Z6II.  The images were excellent, but I couldn't get used to the idea of a "normal" range lens that opened only to f/4.  A bit later I acquired the Z 24-70/2.8 S (Mk 1).    It's imaging is fully comparable to modern good primes, but it's heavy and awkward for [focus-by-wire]manual focusing.  It has allowed me to learn that I'd like a nice 40mm prime lens.

[Wally]

See for yourself, not too bad imho!
Z7, 24-120 Z at 56mm f/4

[Ian Watson]

Sorry for the late reply.

PhotographyLife is a good site. Their reviews are fair and reliable.

The optical difference between the 24-70/4 and 24-120/4 in their shared range is small enough that it should not be a factor in deciding. They both share the same construction. The 24-70/4 collapses for storage and therefore takes up less space in your bag. However, you have to remember to extend it for use. The 24-120/4 offers the extra range and an extra function button.

The prices for new examples are close, so you may as well go for the 24-120/4. On the other hand, as you discovered, the 24-70/4 is readily available used for a lot less.

Good luck!

[Lars Hansen]

Delete

[ColinM]

David, have you considered renting the lens?
Then you could experience the reality instead of trying to interpret the reviews of others.

In the USA, several rental places will deliver & accept rental items by courier.
A long weekend would give you enough time.

Even better, rent several items you're considering and compare
(Obviously only practical for popular lenses.)

In the UK my experience has been that most Nikon Z (and previously F) mount lenses were available to rent.