Nikkor Z 24-120mm f/4 vs Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 for Butterflies

TheSoaringSprite · Jul 3, 2025

If you've been wondering how the Nikkor Z 24-120mm f/4 compares to the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 for butterflies, here's an imperfect comparison. I think this is a "Pacific Azure" butterfly, which has about a 1 inch (or 24-29mm) wingspan. They are tiny.

f52a5f9d2f8646bc97caeb6687582ba6.jpg.png

I think the Z 24-120mm definitely holds its own against a dedicated macro lens! It gives you just a little bit more reach and is of course more versatile for walk-around. Obviously the 105mm is a tad sharper and has a closer focusing distance, but the 24-120mm is no slouch!

--

Dream Source Studio | Photography by J.P.

Welcome to Dream Source Studio, home to sports, wildlife, event, travel & landscape photography. Need help improving your own skills as an aspiring photographer? Check out the new photography tips section or feel free to e-mail me with your questions!

www.dreamsourcestudio.com

@TheSoaringSprite

Kamil Z · Jul 3, 2025

Interesting comparison. But even on my smartphone I could see a difference. On my 32-inch monitor, it's a whole different world. The eyes and wings have much more detail with the MC 105. Still, I find the image from the 24-120 impressive as well, considering what that lens is.

TheSoaringSprite · Jul 3, 2025

Kamil Z said:
Interesting comparison. But even on my smartphone I could see a difference. On my 32-inch monitor, it's a whole different world. The eyes and wings have much more detail with the MC 105. Still, I find the image from the 24-120 impressive as well, considering what that lens is.

Yes, of course the Z MC 105mm is going to give slightly more details. It's a dedicated macro lens!

However, the Z 24-120mm is a great Jack-of-all-trades thanks to its sharpness and short MFD. In a pinch, it can do what many other lenses cannot.

--
http://www.dreamsourcestudio.com
@TheSoaringSprite

Tom Stites · Jul 3, 2025

TheSoaringSprite said:
If you've been wondering how the Nikkor Z 24-120mm f/4 compares to the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 for butterflies, here's an imperfect comparison. I think this is a "Pacific Azure" butterfly, which has about a 1 inch (or 24-29mm) wingspan. They are tiny.

I think the Z 24-120mm definitely holds its own against a dedicated macro lens! It gives you just a little bit more reach and is of course more versatile for walk-around. Obviously the 105mm is a tad sharper and has a closer focusing distance, but the 24-120mm is no slouch!

I agree with the utility of the 24-120 as a semi-macro lens, especially when paired with a 45MP body or an APS-C body like the Z50(II). Also, equally flexible the 100-400mm zoom, I have many shots where I've used that lens and the increased working distance for the same magnification can be a real boon with flighty subjects.

I still have the AFS 105 f2.8 leftover from my DSLR days, but rarely use it unless I'm doing specific macro work...also a 50mm f3.5 P-C lens that I often carry with me since it's small and lightweight...does an excellent job for macro on a 45MP body.

I do think your comparo suffers a bit from the lighting on the shot with the 24-120, but if one realizes the effect that the lighting difference is having, still a useful comparison, so thanks for sharing that.

Cheers!

TheSoaringSprite · Jul 3, 2025

Tom Stites said:
TheSoaringSprite said:

If you've been wondering how the Nikkor Z 24-120mm f/4 compares to the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 for butterflies, here's an imperfect comparison. I think this is a "Pacific Azure" butterfly, which has about a 1 inch (or 24-29mm) wingspan. They are tiny.

I think the Z 24-120mm definitely holds its own against a dedicated macro lens! It gives you just a little bit more reach and is of course more versatile for walk-around. Obviously the 105mm is a tad sharper and has a closer focusing distance, but the 24-120mm is no slouch!

Click to expand...

I agree with the utility of the 24-120 as a semi-macro lens, especially when paired with a 45MP body or an APS-C body like the Z50(II). Also, equally flexible the 100-400mm zoom, I have many shots where I've used that lens and the increased working distance for the same magnification can be a real boon with flighty subjects.

I still have the AFS 105 f2.8 leftover from my DSLR days, but rarely use it unless I'm doing specific macro work...also a 50mm f3.5 P-C lens that I often carry with me since it's small and lightweight...does an excellent job for macro on a 45MP body.
I do think your comparo suffers a bit from the lighting on the shot with the 24-120, but if one realizes the effect that the lighting difference is having, still a useful comparison, so thanks for sharing that.

Cheers!

Yes, I do wish I could have gotten the same pose with both lenses. Butterflies being the way they are, they never sit still long enough to try everything! I need a second Z body!

Swapping lenses took too long.

The 100-400mm seems intriguing for this, but I'll just have to hold out for that 200mm macro or a Z 300mm f/4 with a short MFD!

Tom Stites · Jul 3, 2025

I don't know if you shoot any video, but the 100-400 can do a great job for that shooting in 8K or 4K for use in a 4K timeline and output.

A couple short samples...both in 4K HDR if you view on an HDR capable device, otherwise you'll see in SDR.

Carpenter Bees in non-destructive mode...

Carpenter bees busy on a Japanese Andromeda shrub near my deck. Some interesting behavior in how the access the inner part of the flowers...visible in some of the…

vimeo.com

Butterfly

Gulf Fritillary Butterfly Shot on Nikon Z9 4K NRAW w/Nikkor 100-400mm Zoom Edited in DaVinci Resolve Studio Ver 19 to 4K HDR/HLG

vimeo.com

Cheers!

buildingsights · Jul 3, 2025

TheSoaringSprite said:
TheSoaringSprite wrote:

.

great images as usual!

great comparison, both lenses are excellent for close-ups, and you are right that the 24-120 is great for versatility. the 24-120 has a mag. of less than 1:2, i would love to see a nikkor 105mm MC but @ 2:1. one can only dream!

TheSoaringSprite said:
If you've been wondering how the Nikkor Z 24-120mm f/4 compares to the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 for butterflies, here's an imperfect comparison. I think this is a "Pacific Azure" butterfly, which has about a 1 inch (or 24-29mm) wingspan. They are tiny.

I think the Z 24-120mm definitely holds its own against a dedicated macro lens! It gives you just a little bit more reach and is of course more versatile for walk-around. Obviously the 105mm is a tad sharper and has a closer focusing distance, but the 24-120mm is no slouch!

Kate R · Jul 3, 2025

These are beautiful. Thank you for the comparison!

TheSoaringSprite · Jul 3, 2025

Tom Stites said:
I don't know if you shoot any video, but the 100-400 can do a great job for that shooting in 8K or 4K for use in a 4K timeline and output.

A couple short samples...both in 4K HDR if you view on an HDR capable device, otherwise you'll see in SDR.

https://vimeo.com/1092154250?share=copy

https://vimeo.com/1005599271/25cdf514e8?share=copy

Cheers!

I haven't shot more than a couple of videos with the Z8, but it's always nice to know the option is there. Thanks for the samples!

TheSoaringSprite · Jul 3, 2025

Thank you!

TheSoaringSprite · Jul 3, 2025

Kate R said:
These are beautiful. Thank you for the comparison!

Thanks! My pleasure.

Rene Gr · Jul 4, 2025

Thanks for doing that! Very interesting comparison. Those small butterflies are really busy. I never got one good shot with my 105. Pros use the early morning when it is cold - and I am still sleeping.

Many standard zooms allow micro shots, some delivering more beautiful results than a true macro lens due to better Bokeh quality. I did a similar test with the 70-180 here .

Ernie Misner · Jul 4, 2025

TheSoaringSprite said:
Kamil Z said:

Interesting comparison. But even on my smartphone I could see a difference. On my 32-inch monitor, it's a whole different world. The eyes and wings have much more detail with the MC 105. Still, I find the image from the 24-120 impressive as well, considering what that lens is.

Click to expand...

Yes, of course the Z MC 105mm is going to give slightly more details. It's a dedicated macro lens! However, the Z 24-120mm is a great Jack-of-all-trades thanks to its sharpness and short MFD. In a pinch, it can do what many other lenses cannot.

I agree, the 24-120 is no slouch, and it faired better than I thought it would. Thanks for the fun test.

Joachim Gerstl · Jul 4, 2025

Hi,

For butterflies I would prefer a longer lens. Ideally an 180mm Macro but the Nikon 70-200/4 should also do a great job.

Rene Gr · Jul 4, 2025

I had to go to the garden and try to get one of them quick ones. Ain't easy. Here is the best one I could come up with the 105 MC.

buildingsights · Jul 4, 2025

Rene Gr said:
I had to go to the garden and try to get one of them quick ones. Ain't easy. Here is the best one I could come up with the 105 MC.

.

.

nice one! lovely composition, it is always tricky to get the eyes at high magnification and a narrow DoF.

here are a couple with a Laowa 100mm f/2.8 2:1, with flash @f/8 or f/11, 1/400 sec

BSiler · Jul 4, 2025

. . . and it may not be worth much, but here are a couple more comparison shots. Just in terms of sharpness, I don't see much difference. I shot the 120mm at it's maximum reproduction ratio, and then matched that frame with the 105mm.

120mm at f/4

105mm at f/4

120mm at f/8

105mm at f/8

TheSoaringSprite · Jul 4, 2025

Rene Gr said:
Thanks for doing that! Very interesting comparison. Those small butterflies are really busy. I never got one good shot with my 105. Pros use the early morning when it is cold - and I am still sleeping.

Many standard zooms allow micro shots, some delivering more beautiful results than a true macro lens due to better Bokeh quality. I did a similar test with the 70-180 here .

The Z MC 105mm is excellent and also has great bokeh, but it is a bit too short for the shy subjects. It took a lot of patience to follow a couple of the above butterflies.

I enjoyed using the older Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4D IF-ED with a 1.4TCIII, or macro extension tubes for butterflies, but the AF motor has died twice and I refuse to spend more money trying to get it fixed again. Great lens otherwise.

Rene Gr · Jul 5, 2025

I hope Photography Life does not get angry when I reproduce their findings here. But from the numbers, both lenses are on an excellent level in the center. The difference might indeed be marginal.

You do not need a macro lens if you don't shoot real macros at 1:1. The 24-120 f/4 fortunately has its maximal magnification of 1:2.6 at 120mm. The 70-180 f/2.8 has a better magnification of 1:1.9 at 70mm, but only 1:4 at 180mm. Still, the longer focal range can look much more pleasing for flowers if 1:4 is good enough. The 24-70 f/4, by the way, does also achieve 1:3.3 at 70mm.

Sometimes, I am intended to sell my 105mm for something that I need more often. But then I take close images with it and the punchy results convince me.

d247a1ea3ff74bd0a927a30fc4e6ede5.jpg.png

1adffa3d3fcb42a4b4eb59dd68df7bdd.jpg.png

sirhawkeye64 · Jul 8, 2025

TheSoaringSprite said:
If you've been wondering how the Nikkor Z 24-120mm f/4 compares to the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 for butterflies, here's an imperfect comparison. I think this is a "Pacific Azure" butterfly, which has about a 1 inch (or 24-29mm) wingspan. They are tiny.

I think the Z 24-120mm definitely holds its own against a dedicated macro lens! It gives you just a little bit more reach and is of course more versatile for walk-around. Obviously the 105mm is a tad sharper and has a closer focusing distance, but the 24-120mm is no slouch!

For things like this, I prefer the 24-120 for zoom flexibility. I'll even use my 100-400 if I need some more working room (Even though that lens is slower especially on the long end and bokeh may not be as nice. I mostly only use the macro for flower shots or other non-living subject matter (or subjects at least that don't move very fast or at all).

--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *

Nikkor Z 24-120mm f/4 vs Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 for Butterflies

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Attachments

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts