Thom on D850 midrange zoom: does this make sense?

Started Dec 25, 2017 | Discussions
Mackiesback
Mackiesback Senior Member • Posts: 8,380
Re: Thom on D850 midrange zoom: does this make sense?

SkvLTD wrote:

gladers wrote:

No, it doesn't make sense. The 24-120/4.0 is a good lens. I really can't understand all whining about it. I have it and I like it for what it is. It's a good lens!

+10 to this. In the couple weeks I've had my copy, especially wide open, it definitely delivers way above 24-85. I fail to see how 85-120 range is bad as well, because it's really not. Otherwise MF ring feels miles better, and as does the zoom ring.

While I respect your opinion, this does not concur with the comparisons I have read on the internet between these two lenses. Perhaps sample variation is a factor.

 Mackiesback's gear list:Mackiesback's gear list
Nikon Coolpix A Nikon D50 Nikon D100 Nikon Df Nikon Z6 +18 more
MrHollywood
MrHollywood Senior Member • Posts: 3,875
Re: Thom on D850 midrange zoom: does this make sense?

fishy wishy wrote:

MrHollywood wrote:

toomanycanons wrote:

briantilley wrote:

calson wrote:

It really does not make sense to put something like the 24-85mm on the D850.

It makes sense if the aim is a lighter system with decent image quality.

I had one and sold it as I was not happy with the image quality.

I'm still happily using mine on a D810.

Same with the 24-120mm that I owned and sold.

Still using that one on a D810 as well

Different copies of lenses make a big difference. But assuming that everyone's copies of the 24-85 VR are equal: one man's "good enough, I'm satisfied" is the next man's "horrible, sold it immediately". And so it goes.

How about if we pit the 24-85 VR against the 70-200 F4 at F5.6?

I have both lenses and I know the 24-85 VR does VERY well.

A few years back I posted samples from the 24-85 VR and 24-70 2.8G and folks were pretty impressed by how good the little zoom fared.

So I'm not buying the "horrible" bit at all. The 24-85 VR is also very sharp at 85mm on my D850.

Rob

What now? Pitting one slow zoom against another slow zoom but giving the cheaper one a chance by stopping it down? M'kay...

If you can afford to shoot at f8 all the time and use flash etc., almost any lens will do, which is a time honored fact. But if you were surrounded by all the flashes, strobes and light fittings why would you skimp with the $400 lens.

My 24-85 is very sharp wide open and certainly does NOT need to be stopped down.

The reality is that I sold my 24-70 2.8 because I typically shot it around F4. While it was sharper at the edges/corners, the 24-85 was a close match for sharpness and has VR. The only way I saw noticeable IQ improvement was by using primes. So primes and the 24-85 VR replaced the 24-70 and proved more versatile.

This is NOT to say that the 24-70 2.8 wasn't good. It was very good, but it wasn't a lens that wowed me for the weight and cost. By comparison, my 70-200 FL and F4 lenses always wow me and were worth the money.

This all comes down to how each person uses their gear.

Rob

Rob

 MrHollywood's gear list:MrHollywood's gear list
Nikon D850 Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR Nikon AF-S 70-200mm F2.8E FL ED VR Sony RX100 VI +22 more
Shangri La
Shangri La Contributing Member • Posts: 777
Re: Thom on D850 midrange zoom: does this make sense?
2

Nothing surprising here really. The 24-85 has always been a better lens from various reviews and user experience, when compared to the 24-120. Why would anyone expect anything different on the D850?

 Shangri La's gear list:Shangri La's gear list
Canon PowerShot G9 Nikon D5000 Nikon D750 Phase One Capture One Pro Apple iPhone X
chambeshi Senior Member • Posts: 2,781
Re: Thom on D850 midrange zoom: does this make sense?

toomanycanons wrote:

briantilley wrote:

calson wrote:

It really does not make sense to put something like the 24-85mm on the D850.

It makes sense if the aim is a lighter system with decent image quality.

I had one and sold it as I was not happy with the image quality.

I'm still happily using mine on a D810.

Same with the 24-120mm that I owned and sold.

Still using that one on a D810 as well

Different copies of lenses make a big difference. But assuming that everyone's copies of the 24-85 VR are equal: one man's "good enough, I'm satisfied" is the next man's "horrible, sold it immediately". And so it goes.

Glad to read the point made that variation of the 24-120 f4G. This is one elephant in the room. This factor is revisited in forums, and probably underlies the ambivalent ratings.

I consider myself fortunate my copy delivers good IQ on the D850, and so does the 24-85 G ED (non VR) zoom, but I prefer the greater reach of the 24-120. I concur the 24-85 is the lighter travel lens.

Review on IQ of the 2-85 here

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/238-nikkor-af-s-24-85mm-f35-45g-if-ed-review--test-report

Thom lauded the non-VR 24-85 http://www.bythom.com/2485lens.htm

 chambeshi's gear list:chambeshi's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR +18 more
sandy b
sandy b Veteran Member • Posts: 9,569
Really? Not seeing that
1

DXO has them basically identical. Except at, of course, @86-120. Photography life clearly favors the 24-120. Here is a pretty tech article that does the same:

https://www.lenstip.com/345.11-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_24-85_mm_f_3.5-4.5G_ED_VR_Summary.html

Personally, I doubt I would use either on a D850. For the D850 I would get the Nikon 24-70.

 sandy b's gear list:sandy b's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon D7500 Nikon Z6 Nikon Z50 Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E II +12 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads