Video is now available from the webinar held 14-JAN-2021 with nature photographer and Nikonian Marsel van Oosten. >>>> View the video on this page. Make sure you're logged in.
I think it is really a silly comparison, they are 2 different lenses for 2 different purposes.
The 24-70 (either one) is a constant aperture wide the medium zoom useful when a faster aperture is desired, mainly for DOF purposes.
The 24-200 is a convenience lens when you are willing to trade fast aperture (again, primarily DOF) for the convenience of a Superzoom. DOF isn't important.
Fast aperture these days is mostly a DOF issue, modern cameras' higher ISO performance can overcome the lower light gathering. But you can't get f/4 DOF with a f/6.3 lens.
Mick "The difference between a professional photographer and other photographers is the pro doesn't show you the bad shots."
I think it is really a silly comparison, they are 2 different lenses for 2 different purposes.
The 24-70 (either one) is a constant aperture wide the medium zoom useful when a faster aperture is desired, mainly for DOF purposes.
The 24-200 is a convenience lens when you are willing to trade fast aperture (again, primarily DOF) for the convenience of a Superzoom. DOF isn't important.
Fast aperture these days is mostly a DOF issue, modern cameras' higher ISO performance can overcome the lower light gathering. But you can't get f/4 DOF with a f/6.3 lens.