Reading mode: Light Dark

Is the 24-120 f/4 any good?

Go to last post
M

Mach Schnell

Senior Member
Messages
3,270
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,659
Location
St. George, UT, US
How many times has this topic been beat to death? Yet, the question comes up again and again. Lately, a lot of folk have given the lens a decidedly mediocre rating. I think they are selling the lens short. Will it live up to the quality of a good prime? Not quite. And it certainly cannot shoot at f/2 or f/2.8. But the lens holds it own quite well in the zoom world, in my opinion.

Here are a couple of examples for you to make your own conclusions. Both taken with my D800e on a solid tripod using the best possible technique (mirror up, exposure delay, remote release). Here is a shot from Honfleur France:



ecb1a63c1f8647ebacde7b3f5af8625e.jpg

And here is a 100% crop from slightly off center:

b83c2fd75e5f4fc8924d3712fa4eb185.jpg

Here is another example, from the Lake Shore Drive bridge over the Chicago river:

f964435cabb94afaa3896283102245bc.jpg

And a 100% crop:

c55d7eeb5da6474bbead0872fed62009.jpg

NEF images processed in DXO Photolab. Comments welcome.

--
Steve
 
Mach Schnell said:
How many times has this topic been beat to death? Yet, the question comes up again and again. Lately, a lot of folk have given the lens a decidedly mediocre rating. I think they are selling the lens short. Will it live up to the quality of a good prime? Not quite. And it certainly cannot shoot at f/2 or f/2.8. But the lens holds it own quite well in the zoom world, in my opinion.

Here are a couple of examples for you to make your own conclusions. Both taken with my D800e on a solid tripod using the best possible technique (mirror up, exposure delay, remote release). Here is a shot from Honfleur France:

ecb1a63c1f8647ebacde7b3f5af8625e.jpg

And here is a 100% crop from slightly off center:

b83c2fd75e5f4fc8924d3712fa4eb185.jpg

Here is another example, from the Lake Shore Drive bridge over the Chicago river:

f964435cabb94afaa3896283102245bc.jpg

And a 100% crop:

c55d7eeb5da6474bbead0872fed62009.jpg

NEF images processed in DXO Photolab. Comments welcome.
Click to expand...
Mach Schnell said:
--
Steve
http://www.pbase.com/fotofanatik/image/73553598.jpg
Click to expand...
Yes, it is a great outdoor walk-around lens; one of my favorites. What has always impressed me with this lens is its ability to beautifully render rich colors -- which is nicely demonstrated in your photos above.
 
M S

Those are beautiful . . . nothing wrong with that lens!

Great all around walk around lens!

Thanks for sharing.

Best,

V G
 
Thanks for sharing. I have a good copy and mine is excellent at most aperture and focal length combinations.
 
Mach Schnell said:
How many times has this topic been beat to death? Yet, the question comes up again and again. Lately, a lot of folk have given the lens a decidedly mediocre rating. I think they are selling the lens short. Will it live up to the quality of a good prime? Not quite. And it certainly cannot shoot at f/2 or f/2.8. But the lens holds it own quite well in the zoom world, in my opinion.

Here are a couple of examples for you to make your own conclusions. Both taken with my D800e on a solid tripod using the best possible technique (mirror up, exposure delay, remote release). Here is a shot from Honfleur France:

And here is a 100% crop from slightly off center:

Here is another example, from the Lake Shore Drive bridge over the Chicago river:

And a 100% crop:

NEF images processed in DXO Photolab. Comments welcome.
Click to expand...
These are really nice. Good job. That said, the lens' performance in the center at the wider focal lengths has not been a matter of debate, as far as I know. It's usually edge performance and performance at the longest focal lengths.
 
It’s a 5x optical zoom and has been built with inherent compromises so will never be a great lens. That said I do believe it it the best circa 5 x zoom for Nikon. FF.

Central sharpness at wider angles is a strong point of this lens so your pics as nice as they are don’t add to the debate.
 
Brazo said:
It’s a 5x optical zoom and has been built with inherent compromises so will never be a great lens. That said I do believe it it the best circa 5 x zoom for Nikon. FF.

Central sharpness at wider angles is a strong point of this lens so your pics as nice as they are don’t add to the debate.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of people hyper focus on 100 percent crops. Is the 24-120 perfect? No but it’s got great colors, contrast, and reasonable sharpness across a really broad array of focal lengths. You can easily get large prints and high quality images from it. I think it’s as good a one lens landscape solution as Nikon makes.
 
Van Griff said:
M S

Those are beautiful . . . nothing wrong with that lens!

Great all around walk around lens!

Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
As long as you stay at f/8, as per those photos, the lens is sharp. But a "great all round walk around lens" might need more than that, depending on the user.
 
TN Args said:
Van Griff said:
M S

Those are beautiful . . . nothing wrong with that lens!

Great all around walk around lens!

Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
As long as you stay at f/8, as per those photos, the lens is sharp. But a "great all round walk around lens" might need more than that, depending on the user.
Click to expand...
This one was taken hand-held at 120mm, wide open at f/4. I'd say the lens is at least usable at apertures wider than f/8... :-)

2bf5b04a4ce6475b9efd33d30612af78.jpg
 
Very good "working lens", not a specialist, not an exotic, not a superstar but definitely a strong workhorse that will get you tons and tons of very good images and can be used for professional level work.

If one has a good copy it will pay for itself over and over in both work and enjoyment of use. Definitely underrated in the community from what I see.
 
briantilley said:
TN Args said:
Van Griff said:
M S

Those are beautiful . . . nothing wrong with that lens!

Great all around walk around lens!

Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
As long as you stay at f/8, as per those photos, the lens is sharp. But a "great all round walk around lens" might need more than that, depending on the user.
Click to expand...
This one was taken hand-held at 120mm, wide open at f/4. I'd say the lens is at least usable at apertures wider than f/8... :-)
Click to expand...
"Usable" is so subjective as to be meaningless. I have m43 kit zoom images that look way better than that. Sure, "usable". One can't deny it.

I'm not sure why I entered this thread. I think I took VG's bait in bold above, describing the lens as flawless. As soon as I suggest it is a little less than that, suddenly I am misinterpreted as implying the lens is not "usable".

I certainly think the lens is "usable" -- by using one's noggin to work around its numerous flaws. I'm good at doing that and could make use of this lens. But that is not the same as saying there is nothing wrong with it, and it is a great lens, as quoted above. At its over-1k price I think Nikon could have done a bit better, as Sony have proven.
 
TN Args said:
briantilley said:
TN Args said:
Van Griff said:
M S

Those are beautiful . . . nothing wrong with that lens!

Great all around walk around lens!

Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
As long as you stay at f/8, as per those photos, the lens is sharp. But a "great all round walk around lens" might need more than that, depending on the user.
Click to expand...
This one was taken hand-held at 120mm, wide open at f/4. I'd say the lens is at least usable at apertures wider than f/8... :-)
Click to expand...
"Usable" is so subjective as to be meaningless. I have m43 kit zoom images that look way better than that. Sure, "usable". One can't deny it.
Click to expand...
Good.
TN Args said:
I'm not sure why I entered this thread. I think I took VG's bait in bold above, describing the lens as flawless. As soon as I suggest it is a little less than that, suddenly I am misinterpreted as implying the lens is not "usable".
Click to expand...
Misinterpreted...? You said that the lens is sharp "as long as you stay at f/8" - and chose to highlight that point by editing the post title. That statement is misleading, in my view.

My 24-120mm is an excellent jack-of-all-trades, and gets used at all apertures including quite often wide open, so I posted an example to demonstrate what it can do at f/4. Look at the image at 100%, and note the detail in the machined and cast metal. There is absolutely no reason to limit oneself to f/8.
TN Args said:
I certainly think the lens is "usable" -- by using one's noggin to work around its numerous flaws.
Click to expand...
Saying it has "numerous flaws" is just as much of an exaggeration as saying it is "flawless" (by the way, no-one else actually used that word). Like any lens, it has strengths and weaknesses.
TN Args said:
I'm good at doing that and could make use of this lens. But that is not the same as saying there is nothing wrong with it, and it is a great lens, as quoted above. At its over-1k price I think Nikon could have done a bit better, as Sony have proven.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
One thing worth mentioning is that you can generally easy find one in the $500 range. At that price the lens is a very good value. At its MSRP it is overpriced.

So far as a single lens solution goes for situations when you have good light, it is hard to beat. Perhaps some things are sharper at extreme crops but it does well in a variety of situations and I've had no problem getting good 20x30 prints out of it. I don't ever need to go bigger than that.
 
This lens is known to have a high variance of performance. Several friends who have looked at 3-4 copies have managed to find one that's very good: far above the common reputation for this lens. Also on a D850 in Q mode (EFCS+delay), the VR for whatever reason is pretty incredible in its performance.
 
If you don't need to point it at the sun too much or use the VR, the Nikon 35-135 is as good. The 24-120 seems the same sort of zoom remade for modern 24mm tastes so those on APS-C can enjoy it too.
 
briantilley said:
TN Args said:
briantilley said:
TN Args said:
Van Griff said:
M S

Those are beautiful . . . nothing wrong with that lens!

Great all around walk around lens!

Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
As long as you stay at f/8, as per those photos, the lens is sharp. But a "great all round walk around lens" might need more than that, depending on the user.
Click to expand...
This one was taken hand-held at 120mm, wide open at f/4. I'd say the lens is at least usable at apertures wider than f/8... :-)
Click to expand...
"Usable" is so subjective as to be meaningless. I have m43 kit zoom images that look way better than that. Sure, "usable". One can't deny it.
Click to expand...
Good.
briantilley said:
I'm not sure why I entered this thread. I think I took VG's bait in bold above, describing the lens as flawless. As soon as I suggest it is a little less than that, suddenly I am misinterpreted as implying the lens is not "usable".
Click to expand...
Misinterpreted...? You said that the lens is sharp "as long as you stay at f/8" - and chose to highlight that point by editing the post title. That statement is misleading, in my view.

My 24-120mm is an excellent jack-of-all-trades, and gets used at all apertures including quite often wide open, so I posted an example to demonstrate what it can do at f/4. Look at the image at 100%, and note the detail in the machined and cast metal. There is absolutely no reason to limit oneself to f/8.
briantilley said:
I certainly think the lens is "usable" -- by using one's noggin to work around its numerous flaws.
Click to expand...
Saying it has "numerous flaws" is just as much of an exaggeration as saying it is "flawless" (by the way, no-one else actually used that word). Like any lens, it has strengths and weaknesses.
briantilley said:
I'm good at doing that and could make use of this lens. But that is not the same as saying there is nothing wrong with it, and it is a great lens, as quoted above. At its over-1k price I think Nikon could have done a bit better, as Sony have proven.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Glad you are happy with the lens. Not so glad that you are more than happy to nit-pick my accurate statements, while staying mum about comments saying the lens has nothing wrong with it, and is a great lens. That says heaps (about bias).
 
Last edited:
Another way to look at this and similar pixel peeping issue is, when one can't do the art of photography, one focuses on the pixels. When one can do the art, pixel and blurs are all contributory to a brilliant photo. ;-)
 
Why Toi said:
Another way to look at this and similar pixel peeping issue is, when one can't do the art of photography, one focuses on the pixels. When one can do the art, pixel and blurs are all contributory to a brilliant photo. ;-)
Click to expand...
But when lens puts blur where it wants instead of where photographer wants it, it is no art any more. :-)
 
Sagittarius said:
Why Toi said:
Another way to look at this and similar pixel peeping issue is, when one can't do the art of photography, one focuses on the pixels. When one can do the art, pixel and blurs are all contributory to a brilliant photo. ;-)
Click to expand...
But when lens puts blur where it wants instead of where photographer wants it, it is no art any more. :-)
Click to expand...
Talented photographers don't blame their tools. Fact is, there are few if any 'bad' tools coming out of current day major companies. :-P
 
Why Toi said:
Sagittarius said:
Why Toi said:
Another way to look at this and similar pixel peeping issue is, when one can't do the art of photography, one focuses on the pixels. When one can do the art, pixel and blurs are all contributory to a brilliant photo. ;-)
Click to expand...
But when lens puts blur where it wants instead of where photographer wants it, it is no art any more. :-)
Click to expand...
Talented photographers don't blame their tools. Fact is, there are few if any 'bad' tools coming out of current day major companies. :-P
Click to expand...
Seriously? Blessed who believes. :-)
 
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