Advice / Experience Sought on Nikon 24-120 F4 with D800

psdrage

Hi

I am looking for some real world advice on the Nikon 24-120 F4. I currently have the D800 with 24-70 and 70-200 which are all awesome and I use all the time when I am out on my own.

However, when out with the family I tend to only take the 24-70 to stay light (relative term) but I find the 70 end too short and I am always wanting more reach.

Do any members have any experience of the 24-120 F4 and how it compares to the 24-70 in terms of sharpness / quality. Looking at my metadata I tend to shoot around F4 / F5.6 when out and about with the family so not too worried about the stop lost. Plus VR will compensate for the static subjects I shoot.

Internet reviews seem to either love or hate it, but nobody appears to have reviewed it after living with it for real world shooting and not test chart shooting, which I hate.

Regards

Peter

spraynpray

Please do a forum search before starting a new thread. This topic has been covered in some depth previously.

sevencrossing

very few people have BOTH the 24 -70 AND the 24 -120 so few people can give real life comparisons

the differences are clearly marked on the packet; one has the advantage of being f 2.8 the other has more reach and VR but is "only" f4

I and others I know, who have the 24 -120 are very happy with it ( I have had mine for over 2 years)

every one I know with the 24 -70 also seems to be happy

the 24- 120 is sharp enough for me at f 4 but a bit sharper at f 5.6

there is some vignetting and distortion both are easily correct in Lightroom

sevencrossing

Please do a forum search before starting a new thread. This topic has been covered in some depth previously.

Unfortunately this forum does not have sections and the search also includes the old forum as well
this is a typical search result

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=partner-pub-2246852236957917:7644101644&ie=UTF-8&q=24+-120&sa=Search#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=24 -120&gsc.page=1

psdrage

Thank you @sevencrossing for your constructive comment.

@spraynpray I did look through the Nikon Lenses section but could not find anything, search returned similar results to @sevencrossing, hence why I posted.

Sorry if I offended you @spraynpray but why do you naturally assume someone has done wrong. Pisses me off that attitude. If there was a relevant thread with constructive feedback, the right thing would have been to assume I had not found it by searching and pointed me to it.

But I guess it is easier to criticise then help.

spraynpray

@psdrage: If I were you I would hold back on the bad language if you want help here. But then, if I were you I would have found a whole screen full of excellent advice on the topic you asked about just by typing in a few simple relevant words into the search box at the top of the page.

If you look at the top of the page there is a sticky post that asks the same. Nobody else seems to find that offensive. If you do, you may be more comfortable on some other forum.

@sevencrossing: I had no problems finding a lot of relevant information using the search box as asked.

psdrage

Wow, @spraynpray apologies for the one bad word, I guess I did myself a massive disservice as it gave you something else to complain about me and miss my point about assumptions totally.

Apologies to the other users on this forum for staring a pointless Discussion according to @spraynpray, hope I have not wasted too much of your time.

If anyone uses the D800 with the 24-120 f4 I would love to hear from you, but maybe a PM would be better so that we do not fill the forum up with any more discussion on this topic.

Regards

Peter

sevencrossing

I had no problems finding a lot of relevant information using the search box as asked.

Probably not, you have been here a long time and know what to put in the search box . and interpret the results

I remember when I first joined, continually being told to do a search but never knew which of many topics on the subject I should look at . Some threads have over 1000 posts and frequently go off topic

Perhaps I should take the advice I was given, when I joined " go away and find another forum " but what would be the fun in that

psdrage

Trying to be constructive, I guess part of the issue with the search is it is quite crude and links to the old dead forums, which seem very old and out dated with most stuff I have found to be at least a year or two old.

I would suggest that if the info is over 2 years old it should be removed given how fast tech changes and advances.

Topics on Photography Principals, the Basics, composition etc, stuff that has not changed over time is always valid but kit discussions go stale. Particularly when you are looking to compare a lens on a newer body.

My Sigma 24-70 was fantastic on my D7000, loved it, but it was rubbish on the D800.

Which is why I wanted real world advice about a particular setup not a discussion about a lens from 2 years ago when the D800 did not exist.

I guess what is upsetting is that I tried a search and looked through the Nikon Lens Subsection and found nothing that I felt was relevant.

But hay we live and learn.

haroldp

I use both 24-70 2.8 and 24-120 4.0 on D3x and D800e.

On the D3x, the 24-120 at F4 up to about 70mm, and F5.6 from 70-120 is hard to distinguish from the 24-70.

On the D800e I use the same aperture guidelines, but the 24-70 is clearly better if one looks at 100 %.

On a 13 X 19 print they are indistinguishable for practical purposes given all of the other variables.

I use the 24-70 at 2.8 for theater work where subject motion is the killer, but my 'tourist' kit is the D800e with 24-120, aperture priority at f5.6 and the function button set to switch FX and DX modes.

Works for me.

shawnino

@haroldp that is seriously useful information, as IO can see myself buying one of those lenses but never both. Thank you. What do you think makes the distinction at 100% between D800E and D3x: more MP, or the AA-filter situation (or both)? Thanks.

shawnino

Whoops my train of thought left while boarding was still taking place...: Or is it moreso the lenses themselves?

Golf007sd

@psdrage: Welcome to NRF. I too have the 24-70 & 70-200 2.8...love them both on my D4. I have played with the 24-120 f4 and like many others, have found the performance to very productive...even wide open end & all the way to F/8. Should you get it for an all day shooting, where more reach is needed, then by all means go for it. Hopefully you are able to buy it at a good price as well. :P

Now having set that...there is one thing you many want to consider doing and see if the results are to your liking. Put you D800 into DX mode and see how you like the results of your image with the 24-70 2.8. Maybe the 1.5x crop is enough to get the shots you want and still have the benefits of the 2.8 aperture and lens sharpness.

Best wishes....

DXV_Photo

I have both the 24-70 2.8 and the 24-120 F4. My experience on my D800 would echo what haroldp said. I find the 24-70 a little sharper and the focus is a little faster as well. I found that I like shooting at 2.8 and hardly ever use the 24-120 anymore. In my case for those situation where VR would come in handy I typically have my tripod with me. Also keep in mind that the 24-120 does have more distortion in the corners and vignetting. While these are easily fixable they are worth noting. Also, I find the 24-70 focuses better in low light situations. The 24-120 will hunt a little when things get dark.

If you are ok with it being F4 and don't like or can't have a tripod with you then it might be a good fit. Don't get me wrong, I like my the 24-120 lens but I like my 24-70 more.

CEBlueclouds

When I initially got my D800 in May 2012, being a casual photographer who likes to travel as light as possible the 24-120 was my default option and it was happy with my results.....but all that changed when I gave my 24-70 f/2.8 a chance on the 800 and I found the focus much faster and lens much sharper...yes I gave up on the reach but with the 1.5 crop and the extra stop (most useful at night), the 24-120 f/4 has been gathering dust for months now! So it all depends on what your preferences are. If you want a lens for travel and casual photography, the 24-120 would not fail you but if you want a more spot on lens that can take better advantage of your 800, the 24-70 f/2.8 may be best. Just my 2 cents..... BTW I may be able to give you a good deal on my 24-70 which I may now sell...

Golf007sd

BTW I may be able to give you a good deal on my 24-70 which I may now sell...

I take you mean 24-120 f/4...yes?

CEBlueclouds

Yes 24-120 f/4 Golf...my error...thanks!

studio460

I never opted for the otherwise excellent AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G, because I also felt it was too short. I bought the AF-S 24-120mm f/4.0G VR because its focal-length range seemed "just right." And, I really like having VR. It's long enough for headshots, but wide enough for full-length shots as well. That said, I do only use it for flash-fired event shooting, which, for those types of events, performs superbly. As far as I can tell, it's very sharp, but I've never directly compared it with a 24-70mm. Note that the 24-120mm is on Nikon's D800/E "approved list."


Nikon D3s + SB-800 + AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4.0G VR @ 110mm
ISO: 200; 1/250th @ f/5

Again, although my new "travel lens" is also an "f/4.0-lens" (AF-S 16-35mm f/4.0G VR), if it's daytime, or you're planning to be flash-fired, f/4.0 lenses are totally fine. But for available-light, or night interiors, I switch to f/1.4 primes, or f/2.8 zooms.

sevencrossing

very few people have BOTH the 24 -70 AND the 24 -120 so few people can give real life comparisons

Very please to see I was wrong

If I am working in low light levels and/ or need faster focusing; I use the 70-200 f2.8 or the 50mm f 1.4 but for landscapes and travel the 24 -120 is fine as fast focusing is not an issue

Msmoto

Yes, for reasons yet to be determined, the search function does not easily pull up the previous threads on this comparison. I have the 24-120....here is an image I have posted before.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7014984231/sizes/o/in/set-72157630044833773/

120mm, f/10 at 1/100 sec. A good example of how the VR is very useful.

So, the longer reach, VR are the advantages for the 24-120. For the 24-70, it is one of the sharpest, lacks VR, but has the extra stop, costs 50% more. In practical terms, I doubt one will see a difference in the images in the vast majority of situations.

Your decision....maybe the 135mm f/2 Nikkor would be an addition for you...??? It is a sweet lens!

shawnino

Thank you @msmoto for bringing up my favourite lens, 135 f/2. There is indeed a thread on it in the old forum that started with a great review by a poster I believe handled "reddirector" (no, I cannot find it). 135 f/2 has (so far) stopped me from getting 24-120 as I have primes up to 85. I like that 135 f/2 so much I spin its flaws as positives ("heavy" = "solid", "old design" = "classic", "slower af" = "exacting"...).

Msmoto

@shawnino

And, to anyone who has a DSLR camera. for someone who wants to carry a camera around and just take snapshots, maybe the issue of weight is a valid complaint. But, IMO, if one is interested in obtaining the best photos, weight may not be a realistic consideration. In the pro field one uses what does the job.

As to the "slower focus" of the 135mm f/2...I do not understand what folks are talking about. I have never found this is an issue. But, I would not shoot motorsports with this, nor BIF. And portraits do not require fast focus in AF-C. "Old design".....probably a comment made by someone who does not have the lens...LOL

The 135mm f/2 is a stunner IMO.

And, if I had a 24-70 as the OP has, I would consider the 135mm f/2 to be a very realistic addition...particularly if one wants some bokeh. Maybe Squamish will comment on this.

autofocus

I have a D800 and 24-120mm. I love the combination for walking around. The lens is very sharp and I have no problems with the constant f4. In lower light I just bump the ISO and drive on. I think it gets less attention because it bridges the gap in the trinity. Still, a great lens. My only nit is lens creep. You will need a lens band to keep it at 24mm while walking around. Other than that, love it!

psdrage

Thank you everyone for the constructive feedback, despite the shaky start with @spraynpray to the thread, I feel I have received some really useful advice and when coupled with that from a couple of other forums, all pointing in the same direction, it has helped me make my mind up.

I will be purchasing the 24-120 f4 as my family outing lens. Having 2 young children any sacrifice in Light / IQ is made up for in convenience and lighter kit.

With the DX Mode assigned to a Function Button, via Bank B as suggested by @haroldp I can easily go from 24 to 180 which almost covers my 24-70 and 70-200 range.

I will continue to use the 24-70 & 70-200 for my personal photography, but the ability to carry that extra stuff for the Wife or Kids will be invaluable !!!

Thanks again

Peter

sevencrossing

With the DX Mode assigned to a Function Button, via Bank B as suggested by @haroldp I can easily go from 24 to 180 which almost covers my 24-70 and 70-200 range.

why not simply crop in post ?
it is easy to cut something out afterward but if it is cropped of the original , you can not stick it back

studio460

My only nit is lens creep. You will need a lens band to keep it at 24mm while walking around.

Mine also "creeps." A bit annoying, but otherwise, an excellent, highly versatile lens for event coverage (but, as I mentioned, my hiking/travel lens of choice is the AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4.0G VR).