Reading mode: Light Dark

D750 : 24-85 or 24-120 lens?

Go to last post
Hans vdC

Hans vdC

Senior Member
Messages
3,559
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Oudenaarde
I'm very much considering to get the D750 with a kitlens. Both options are available here in Belgium. The 24-85 costs 2.749 euro, the kit with the 24-120 is 150 euro more. Which lens is optically the best performer? Or course, the reach of the 24-120 is a nice bonus and it is F4 throughout the range, but maybe the 24-85 is a lot better optically?

I will pair this with the 35/1.8 and possibly a 85mm too.
 
Hans von der Crone said:
I'm very much considering to get the D750 with a kitlens. Both options are available here in Belgium. The 24-85 costs 2.749 euro, the kit with the 24-120 is 150 euro more. Which lens is optically the best performer? Or course, the reach of the 24-120 is a nice bonus and it is F4 throughout the range, but maybe the 24-85 is a lot better optically?

I will pair this with the 35/1.8 and possibly a 85mm too.
Click to expand...
The discount of the kit with the 24-120 makes it a no brainer (It is normally around 450 euro more expensive than the 24-85). Both lens are arguably the same in terms of IQ (I use the 24-85 on my D800). The 24-120 has more reach, the 24-85 is smaller and a lot lighter.
 
The 24-120 is slightly better. If the price difference isn't big, get the 24-120.

If the price difference is large (like getting a refurbished 24-85 for $289 in the US) the choice gets more complex (and probably leans towards the 24-85 because $289 is crazy cheap IMO).
 
Hans von der Crone said:
I'm very much considering to get the D750 with a kitlens. Both options are available here in Belgium. The 24-85 costs 2.749 euro, the kit with the 24-120 is 150 euro more. Which lens is optically the best performer? Or course, the reach of the 24-120 is a nice bonus and it is F4 throughout the range, but maybe the 24-85 is a lot better optically?

I will pair this with the 35/1.8 and possibly a 85mm too.
Click to expand...
I think the 24-120mm F4 at only 150 euro more is an awesome deal.

I had both at the same time for over a week for testing, sold the 24-85. Not much difference in image quality; but I liked the weather sealing of the 24-120, the reach, and very slightly higher contrast ( just a tinny bit, not a deal breaker ).
 
Optically Nikkor 24-120 f/4 is something better than Nikkor 24-85 at all focal range at all aperture except at 85 mm wide open when 24-85 is clearly better. The reach at 120 mm is a decisive factor for my style to get one "all workaround single lens for FX".

I used that lens in combination with Nikkor 12-24 f/4 for my "workaround set up" at DX format but this lens alone can make the job at FX. I am plenty satisfied with it when mounted on my D810.

























All the best

--
O.Cristo - An Amateur Photographer
Opinions of men are almost as various as their faces - so many men so many minds. B. Franklin
 

Attachments

  • 3034932.jpg
    3034932.jpg
    546.9 KB · Views: 0
  • 3034936.jpg
    3034936.jpg
    349.1 KB · Views: 0
  • 3034939.jpg
    3034939.jpg
    301.4 KB · Views: 0
  • 3034943.jpg
    3034943.jpg
    362 KB · Views: 0
I have the 24-120mm f4 and considering the D750. I've never used the 24-85mm but popular opinion is that the IQ is pretty close. So my opinion is pick the lens that best fits your needs. Do you need the 85-120mm focal range? Does the size and weight difference of the two lens make a difference to you? Consider all aspects of the lens and make your decision.

By the way I do like my 24-120mm f4 a lot and chose it for the additional range.
 
Optically they're pretty similar, but it sounds like a screaming deal to get the 24-120 for that close to the same price. The 24-85 is a lot smaller and lighter (and faster at the wide end), so you might find it suits your needs better. But given the much larger difference in price between the two lenses on the street, I'd still go for the 24-120, sell it, and buy the 24-85 for much less. That really sounds like a steal on the 24-120...

-Ray
--------------------------------------
We judge photographers by the photographs we see. We judge cameras by the photographs we miss - Haim Zamir
www.flickr.com

Ray

Explore Ray’s 2,013 photos on Flickr!
www.flickr.com www.flickr.com
 
which store in belgium, price in NL is higher it seems.
 
I am a fan of the 24-85 for its price, I have little in the way of complaints when there is decent light, but if presented with a similar choice, I'd go for the 24-120. It softens up a bit on the long end, but gives up little to nothing in the shared range. For the small increment, I'd grab the 24-120.
 
24-120 hands down for the negligible price difference.
 
check dxo rating on those 2 lens - 24-120 is a dud - 24-85 is so so - the 24-70 2.8 is only slightly better rated then the 24-85 and cost 3 times more $ and is 4 times heavier.

get a few primes

35-2. $350 new $150 used, then either the 50-1.8 d or g , then 85-1.8g - with those primes, quality is a million times better and faster and lighter

Zooms on a fx should be baned
 
I have the Nikon 24-85 lens and it is very good. Used it on d600, d700 and d3s. However totally disagree with primes being the best for fx only...maybe only at extreme telephoto lens and for macro work.

The quality of my 28-70 f2.8, 14-24, and 70-200 f2.8 II still blow me away!

Tan

miamied said:
check dxo rating on those 2 lens - 24-120 is a dud - 24-85 is so so - the 24-70 2.8 is only slightly better rated then the 24-85 and cost 3 times more $ and is 4 times heavier.

get a few primes

35-2. $350 new $150 used, then either the 50-1.8 d or g , then 85-1.8g - with those primes, quality is a million times better and faster and lighter

Zooms on a fx should be baned
Click to expand...
 
The 24-85 is a fine, but rather ordinary lens, not taking advantage of the full frame sensor for creating shallow DOF. What 120mm @ f4 offers you is notably more opportunity for background separation in portraiture type situations. If you are likely to use a kit lens for a lot of this sort of shooting, it might be a consideration, especially with the bargain bundle options.

On the other hand the 24-85 is a nice light and pretty compact zoom, as a backup to a nice set of primes.

The 24-120 might be a good option for video, as the D750 is shaping up to be a pretty good performer there. Fixed aperture is good for video (zoom without changing exposure), and I would like to know if the VR is better for video, a serious consideration for hand held shooting.
 
BasiliskPhoto said:
The 24-85 is a fine, but rather ordinary lens, not taking advantage of the full frame sensor for creating shallow DOF. What 120mm @ f4 offers you is notably more opportunity for background separation in portraiture type situations. If you are likely to use a kit lens for a lot of this sort of shooting, it might be a consideration, especially with the bargain bundle options.

On the other hand the 24-85 is a nice light and pretty compact zoom, as a backup to a nice set of primes.

The 24-120 might be a good option for video, as the D750 is shaping up to be a pretty good performer there. Fixed aperture is good for video (zoom without changing exposure), and I would like to know if the VR is better for video, a serious consideration for hand held shooting.
Click to expand...
You NEED VR if you want to handhold video... It gets too choppy otherwise, a tripod is a must .
 
PSCL1 said:
24-120 hands down for the negligible price difference.
Click to expand...
Am I missing something?

The 24-120 costs $1,300 new. The 24-85 costs $600 new, and due to its inclusion in d600/d610 kits (and the fact that Nikon were practically giving the lens away as part of the kit for a long time), excellent copies can be found on FM and elsewhere for about half that.

But even without taking the robust used market for the 24-85 into consideration, I would say that $700 is hardly "negligible."
 
Last edited:
paulski66 said:
PSCL1 said:
24-120 hands down for the negligible price difference.
Click to expand...
Am I missing something?

The 24-120 costs $1,300 new. The 24-85 costs $600 new, and due to its inclusion in d600/d610 kits (and the fact that Nikon were practically giving the lens away as part of the kit for a long time), excellent copies can be found on FM and elsewhere for about half that.

But even without taking the robust used market for the 24-85 into consideration, I would say that $700 is hardly "negligible."
Click to expand...
You did not read the original post.... The difference is 150 Euro between the 2 kits.

The 24-120 can be had for 1086 on Ebay, brand new, from US sellers. That's not a bad price....
 
Photographer124 said:
paulski66 said:
PSCL1 said:
24-120 hands down for the negligible price difference.
Click to expand...
Am I missing something?

The 24-120 costs $1,300 new. The 24-85 costs $600 new, and due to its inclusion in d600/d610 kits (and the fact that Nikon were practically giving the lens away as part of the kit for a long time), excellent copies can be found on FM and elsewhere for about half that.

But even without taking the robust used market for the 24-85 into consideration, I would say that $700 is hardly "negligible."
Click to expand...
You did not read the original post.... The difference is 150 Euro between the 2 kits.

The 24-120 can be had for 1086 on Ebay, brand new, from US sellers. That's not a bad price....
Click to expand...
I only skimmed the original post. My bad.
 
paulski66 said:
PSCL1 said:
24-120 hands down for the negligible price difference.
Click to expand...
Am I missing something?

The 24-120 costs $1,300 new. The 24-85 costs $600 new, and due to its inclusion in d600/d610 kits (and the fact that Nikon were practically giving the lens away as part of the kit for a long time), excellent copies can be found on FM and elsewhere for about half that.

But even without taking the robust used market for the 24-85 into consideration, I would say that $700 is hardly "negligible."
Click to expand...
Paulski,

The OP mentioned the price of two D750 kits in Belgium, one with the 24-85 and one with the 24-120. The one with the 24-120 is only 150 euros more than the one with the 24-85. Hence, the comment about a negligible price difference.

From all I've seen, the 24-85 doesn't perform quite as well as the 24-120, and there is that huge price difference in the retail prices of the lenses. For such a small kit price difference, and for the various benefits of the 24-120 over the 24-85, I'd go for the 24-120 kit.

Sam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top