Nikkor 24-120.. Any Satisfied Customers?
I currently have the 28-105 and am very happy w/the image quality, BUT... really want more range on both ends for my "standard, typically on the camera, zoom". Torn between the 24-120 (very topsy-turvy in ratings department) and the Tamron 24-135 (consistently praised lens).
I would really like to stay w/Nikkor's, and love the 24-120 range, but am very reluctant due to the consistently mixed reactions to this specific lens. So curious to know if there is anyone of our illustrious bunch that has and actually loves the 24-120... then the final part, how do they compare it to the 28-105 (personal experience impressions preferred).
Thanks very much for your willingness to share your experiences w/the 24-120.
#1. "RE: Nikkor 24-120.. Any Satisfied Customers?" | In response to Reply # 0BJNicholls Charter MemberTue 16-Oct-01 02:45 AM
I owned the 24-120 and liked it. The lens gets soft after about 85mm, however. That's why I sold it and got the 24-85 Nikkor. It's a little better across its range compared to the 24-120, but it's also faster and has macro focusing. I gave up the soft long end of the older zoom for a better all around lens. I can't shed any light on the Tamron, I've never used it.
#2. "Any Satisfied Customers?... Not me!" | In response to Reply # 0f8bthere Basic MemberTue 16-Oct-01 09:30 AM
The 24-120mm lens is absolutely the least satisfying experience I ever had with a "Nikon" lens. I was not expecting prime lens quality, I am realistic, but I shot a big group of film with this lens upon buying it, and was not impressed. I did an informal test against my Nikkor 24mm, 50mm and 105mm lenses, and the results made me put the zoom permanently on the shelf.
I dislike slow lenses anyway, but slow lenses that require me to stop-down even more than the not so bright maximum aperture, just to get adequate quality really makes it a useless tool to me. All of the above prime lenses at their maximum apertures beat the zoom closed two stops... and don't forget, that means closing two stops from apertures that are already up to two stops less than the primes to start with.
I have to admit, the actual use of the lens was great... very quick framing with all of my most used focal lengths covered effortlessly. But what good is speed if you wouldn't want to show the pictures to anyone?
#3. "RE: Any Satisfied Customers?... Not me!" | In response to Reply # 2WingSpan Basic MemberTue 16-Oct-01 02:17 PM
Indeed this lens does require a fair amount of light to really perform well. However, on it's plus side it is fast to frame, fast to focus, and it has a very versatile zoom range. Just a bit range more than many lenses, however you do pay a fairly good price for that convenience.
The reason that I tried and returned 3 of these lenses is a case of mechanical problems. All of the lenses I tried were very "floppy". The (plastic) barrel of the lens would wobble quite easily, and these were new lenses. I can only imagine what they would be like after a few years of anything but the softest of care. I have since gone back to primes, and find that Nikkor lenses with metal bodies are as solid as they get. (The weight is an issue, but is worth the trade off to me)
I do however occasionally yearn for a really good zoom in this range, mostly when I travel...
My Photo Gallery