OK, So What's the Verdict on the 24-120 f/4?

<p>Great conversation so far, and Ellis's and Shun's comments especially are motivating me to get out the plastic.</p>

<p>I usually shoot portraits and street photography, and like the 24 mm focal length, so there are good reasons for me to have a go at this lens. I used to have a 35-70 f/2.8 Nikkor but I was never quite sure how it was better than a 50 mm lens plus a step or two forward or backward. So the 24-70 is not that more attractive.</p>

<p>Interesting, though, the comparison of this lens with the 28-300.</p>

<p>Ken Rockwell loves the 28-300, but that doesn't mean its a bad lens. Others have said in direct comparison with the 24-120 that in their common range the 24-120 is sharper than the 28-300. I've never used a VR lens so its a bit hard for me to think about hand-holding a 300 mm lens and getting sharp images.</p>

<p>Among people I trust (as compared to Ken Rockwell), Bjorn Rorstlett likes the 24-120, or so he said in a post to a bulletin board, though sadly he is no longer doing detailed reviews.</p>

<p>Thom Hoban hasn't weighed in on it yet. But I may not be able to wait for Thom.</p>

 

<p>If you get the 24-120mm/f4 AF-S VR, you need to understand its limitations and buy it for the right reasons. As I said, "It highly depends on what you are using this lens for."<br>

<br />This is a 5x zoom, so it is not going to be the sharpest lens around, although it is quite sharp as you can see from some of the examples above (not the one captured @ ISO 6400, of course). For a 5x zoom, distortion and vignetting come with the territory. Moreover, it maxes out at f4; that is going to be a problem under very dim conditions. Keep in mind that the best zooms such as the 14-24mm/f2.8, 70-200mm/f2.8 VR ii, and 200-400mm/f4 VR ... are typically 2x to 3x.<br>

<br />I use it for the extra reach to capture children and their expression; some of those are priceless to parents and who cares about distortion and vignetting in those images? In other words, under those circumstances I prefer zoom range than image quality. It is a decent "walk around" lens also, but it is definitely cannot replace the 24-70mm/f2.8 indoors.<br>

<br />BTW, here is the 24-120mm/f4 next to the 24mm/f2.8 AF-D. Clearly it is not some "compact" lens; neither is the 16-35mm/f4 AF-S VR. The front element is very close to the rim so that I typically have a Nikon NC protection filter on it.</p><div></div>

<p>Good morning...<br />I have had the 24-120 F4 lens for a few months now and I love it...<br />It's not the smallest lens and could get quite heavy but I never buy any lens I can't carry for a day.<br>

I use it on a D300 by the way and hopefully soon ona D700 on my trip to Japan...</p>

<p>I tried the 24-120 F4 VR in some cameras, film and digital (mostly F100 and D700). It's a very good walkaround lens, multi-purpose, and the worse and best things I find it are: terrible distortion (specially at 24mm - dont ever use it on buildings), but on the other side, the best VR system I have ever seen! (much better then canon's 24-105) It really works! I took some shots handheld at very low speeds (1/3 or 1/2 secs - cant remember exactly sice it was on the F100).</p>

<p>Here's an example of Santarem's catedral ceiling Nikon D700, F/8 24mm ( i also think i need a wider lens)</p><div></div>

<p>And FWIW, a pic with the lenses mentioned in this thread: 28-105AFD, 24-85AFS and 24-120/4 (62, 67 and 77mm filter threads, respectively). As Shun mentions, I also like to use a filter on the 24-120 (in fact is the only lens I use with filter/without hood).</p><div></div>

<p>Sample pic, 200ISO, 24-120/4 (44mm) @ f8...</p>

<p><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ftQ41CUrawY/TUhzLpNCNBI/AAAAAAAAACI/F4RYXMhSG_g/s1600/nwp052011.jpg" alt="" width="699" height="465" /></p>

<p>Crop #1, 100%:</p><div></div>

<p>Crop #2, 100%:</p>

<div></div>

<p>Gregory, in my experience (it does not implies a scientifical test) the new 24-120 is a much better lens. Only the VR makes it worth it. It is contrastier and sharper to my eyes, althought not by a huge margin... in certain pics. I`m not qualified to give an accurate opinion because I have not compared them seriously at different apertures, distances and zoom settings along the frame (I`m getting old!). Simply looking at the bunch of images, the ones from the 24-120 look better (again, higher contrast and a bit sharper) at most zoom settings.<br /> Check a 24-85AFS pic below, taken with similar settings to the sample above (although with different light, I know):</p><div></div>

<p>100% crop:</p><div></div>

<p>I love my 24-120.<br>

Here is an example of it at 24 mm.</p><div></div>

<p>and here is an example of it long.</p><div></div>

<p>...And lenses shown are WITHOUT the hoods.. That means these zoom lenses are too big to my taste for many purposes. For organised 'people events' (weddings, parties) they are fine, though. And the reach of 24-210 is very attractive.</p>

<p>Sadly, hoods for 4x, 5x telescopic type wide angle zooms use to be awkward designs. Usually too wide, too short, too futile, attached to the front element... proned to take all knocking opportunities. I wonder how many people use them.<br /> The 28-105 isn`t even a petal design but an ugly wide dish. The 24-85AFS use a smallish petal type one, maybe the most/only usable to my taste. The 24-120/4 hood makes the lens even more bulky, front headed and bump-eater.</p>

<p>Shun, its precisely what are the limitations of the 24/120 that I'm trying to find out. </p>

<p>I'm going to shoot mostly portrait and street with it, mostly wide open to get as much separation between my subject and the background as I can. I want the wide end for street work and the long end for portraits and for isolation in the street when I can't get closer to the subject when the decisive moment is happening.</p>

<p>Most everything people have said here so far sounds good to me. </p>

<p>The limitations are distortion, vignetting and f4 for indoors.</p>

<p>Are you using this on FX or DX. On DX, 120mm is reasonably long.</p>

<p>I will be using this on my D700.</p>

<p>I want to make sure I can nail this kind of shot.</p><div></div>

<p>For sure you can get this pic with a 24-120/4. In fact, I think it will be noticeably sharper and contrastier. You can get it even closer from the same focus distance (increased sharpness feel and higher isolation). You can have it even with the 28-300, and many other lenses, too.<br /> The difference and good thing with the 24-120/4 is that you can keep the aperture priority to shoot without flash (even at f4 in any focal), following the action and adjusting the zoom without shutter speed modification. This gives to the photographer the highest control at the scene.</p>

<p>A note about street photography; from a classic point of view, I`d say vignetting is not and issue, I think distortion is not an issue at all too, but aperture could be. If light is dim or the action is fast enough you`ll have to increase the ISO to have the right shutter speed. Anyway, not everything need to be embroidered in life... :)</p>

<p>... forget to mention that f4 does not provide the isolation power many times seen in modern "classic" street photography. Wider apertures are commonly used for that task (f2, f1.4) although in the gold era they (Capa, HCB) used to shoot with f3.5 or f2.8 lenses, I think.</p>

<p>I should have mentioned that the 24-120mm I used in the above photos was the AF-D version f/3.5-5.6 and used on a Nikon N80 using Fuji pro 160. I find this to be a great combination. I don't see any appreciable distortion in the photo shot at 24mm. I think I payed $60 for the lens in used but LN condition at a local photo shop. I showed it as it came out of the camera, developed and scanned at Costco, and resized by me using irfanview. The photo is far from great art, but I wanted a scene with a lot of man made artifacts in it to help me see any distortion. I expected a lot of barrel distortion but really don't see any.</p>

<p>The child photos shown above are lovely. I especially like the one of the child playing with an i-phone. With the way things are going in the world and US, it is hard for any adult to experience the perfect innocent joy shown in that photo.</p>

<p>Thanks for all your input. B&H has my 24-120 on the way to me.</p>