24-85 vs 24-120
- Thread starter ecurbw
- Start date
There you go.. pros and cons of each.
24-85VR: Nikkor AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
24-120/4CVR: Nikkor AF-S 24-120mm f/4G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
24-85VR: Nikkor AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
24-120/4CVR: Nikkor AF-S 24-120mm f/4G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
same same but the spots is making me in a dilemma
but i don't like both the 24-85 and 24-120 (personal pref)
I had a look at both physically. If you go with 24-120, you may as well stretch it a bit and go for the 24-70 2.8 or 28-70 2.8.
I went for the 24-85 and use the balance to buy prime lenses.
I went for the 24-85 and use the balance to buy prime lenses.
I was wondering why the 70200 F4 lens verdict is so much difference from the other 2 F4 lens as below :
Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/4 G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
Nikkor AF-S 16-35mm f/4 G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
Nikkor AF-S 24-120mm f/4G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
:dunno:
i tried the 24-85VR.. very good lens but not worth the price i would rather get the cheaper and faster tamron 28-75 f2.8. The 24-120 F4 VR got lots of mix reviews.. some pro say until damed good some said is a sh1t lens. I am using FX but all primes only.. 24mm, 50mm, 85mm and the only zoom FX lens is 70-200VR2.
If u on budget and want to cover all range get the non VR 24-85 AFS and a 70-300VR and another prime like 28mm F1.8 or the super sharp sigma 35mm f1.4 for low light shooting.
If u on budget and want to cover all range get the non VR 24-85 AFS and a 70-300VR and another prime like 28mm F1.8 or the super sharp sigma 35mm f1.4 for low light shooting.
I am no pro but 24-120mm f4 is my go to video lens. For photo it's sharp and the range it covers is pretty good, my only problem with it is the distortion. But if u do not always use its widest and longest end, it's good enough.
But end of the day prime is still something I prefer for photo.
But end of the day prime is still something I prefer for photo.
Truth is reviewers & reviews are but subjective. Reviewers have their own personal preferences, bias, agendas, idiosyncracies etc. For some, the trinity lens are like holy grails, the be all & end all, nothing else is ever good enough. Others are just obsessed with technical details, specs & assessments.
My own experience with the 24-120mm is close to the review here
Nikon 24-120mm VR Review
Have compared it side by side with the 24-70 f2.8, primes like the 85mm f1.8g, 135mm f2 DC & taken thousands of photos with it on many travels. Am completely satisfied with it, notwithstanding inevitable but acceptable tradeoffs & putting bragging rights & ego aside. For me, the extra reach & VR are quite indispensible for what I take with it as a all-in-one lens. Best is to try the lens out personally to see if it suits one's needs & expectations.
The 24-85 is also reviewed here
Nikon 24-85mm VR Review
My own experience with the 24-120mm is close to the review here
Nikon 24-120mm VR Review
Have compared it side by side with the 24-70 f2.8, primes like the 85mm f1.8g, 135mm f2 DC & taken thousands of photos with it on many travels. Am completely satisfied with it, notwithstanding inevitable but acceptable tradeoffs & putting bragging rights & ego aside. For me, the extra reach & VR are quite indispensible for what I take with it as a all-in-one lens. Best is to try the lens out personally to see if it suits one's needs & expectations.
The 24-85 is also reviewed here
Nikon 24-85mm VR Review
Last edited:
s1221ljc said:
That's what I like to hear.
I was using prime lens only, many of which are old manual focus legends and they are motor than up to the task. But at -15C changing lens was a decidedly difficult thing to do and I ended up using my Ai 28mm f/2 almost exclusively. Nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that I switched off my medium tele side of my brain during the trip.
So I was deciding between absolute quality (24-70) and the size/price compromise, smallest and cheapest (24-85) and in between but best range (24-120). All latest versions.
Right now I'm leaning on 24-120. Body D800.
I'm in exactly the same dilemma. Been using the old 24-120 VR and had that lens on my D700 almost 90% of the time due to the range. I know the quality of the lens is nothing to shout about, but the focal range just makes it the most convenient lens to bring out to any event that you dont know what to expect. And I have shot 90%+ of my images on this lens even though I almost always had a 105 micro/portrait lens, a 20mm prime and 50mm prime in the bag at the same time. Just too lazy to change lens.
Similar threads
