Nikkor Z 24-120 f4S

[Rich Rosen]

Prior to this model 24-120, I owned two previous models; the F 24-120 f4G VR, and the first 24-120 (non VR). I hesitated buying this lens, because previous models image quality fell off noticeably at focal lengths above 70mm (the first 24-120), and 85mm ( 24-120 f4 G VR). I was kind of hoping that Nikon would follow their original lens plan and introduce a 24-105 f4, like the excellent Sigma and Canon renditions. I surmised (ha ha) that the shorter Zoom would give me excellent image quality throughout the range with only slight fall off at the longest end. But that is exactly what I get with the Z24-120 f4S.

I also expected the new model to have lens based VR and build quality on par with the Z 24-70 f4S. Wrong again... and again. I thought that a lens reaching out to 120mm would need lens based VR in addition to IBIS. It was a little disappointing that it didnt. Besides the Z6II, which has IBIS, I also own the Z fc which does not. I've used lens and camera setups for years that didn't have VR and / or IBIS, so not having VR was a luxury I could do without if I really want the lens. But it would've been nice to have that stabilizing mechanism for the smaller lighter camera.

The 24-70 f4S is a well built lens. While it feels cheap, it is actually a robust tool. However, its build quality pales when compared to its sibling, the Z 24-70 f2.8S. I fully expected the Z 24-120 f4S to have the same build quality as the 24-70 f4S. I was wrong to my happy surprise. Except for the lens OLED display, the Z 24-120, has the build quality of the 24-70 f2.8S. It has the same controls, such as L-fn, and function ring (useless), as well as the focus and zoom rings. However there is an inconsistency in the placement of those rings between Z lenses. On the longer zooms ( in my case the 100-400, and the 70-200 Zs), the zoom rings are closest to the front element, while on the the shorter Zooms (24-70S f2.8, and 24-120 Zs) it is the focus ring that is closest to the front element. On three of my zoom lenses, the Zoom ring is considerably the widest of the rings, but on the Z 24-70 f2.8S, while the Z ring is only slightly wider. So besides screwing with your muscle memory, Nikon also screws with your touch sensitivity. The Z24-120 also doesn't have a lens hood that locks in place and a button to unlock it, which the other three feature.

How does the Z 24-120 image quality compare to its predecessor, the 24-120 f4 G VR? In my opinion, the Z out classes the F model at every focal length, but especially at the longest and the widest lengths. It is no surprise that one can use most Z lenses wide open and still get sharp photos. It is also no surprise that image sharpness in the corners and edges hold their own, quite well. This lens is no exception. While it cannot compare to the Z 1.8 primes, for image quality or bokeh, it is not far off those marks. The Z24-120 f4 S is a convenience lens. It gives 7 marked focal lengths and every mm between 24mm and 120mm in one lens, and also gives you very good usable image quality through out its range. Are there issues? Sure. Bokeh isn't great, corners are sharp from 24-70mm but softer from 70-120. But in real usage, this lens is worth it.

 

[dspoel]

Thanks for your review.

Since you own both this lens and the 24-70/2.8, when do you pick one over the other? And do you carry along both lenses all the time?

 

[m_black]

Thanks for your review.

Since you own both this lens and the 24-70/2.8, when do you pick one over the other? And do you carry along both lenses all the time?

Great review, thanks Rich.

I have both lenses too. For me, the 24-70 is the work horse for paid work. Weddings, events etc where I'm basically at 2.8 all day. The 24-120 is my "f/8" lens (just my own term). When I need flexible range and don't need shallow DOF I.e travel or street. I also use it a lot for video. In S35/APS-C mode it makes a great 36-180 f/4 lens. I also had the latest f mount version and was like warm about it. Never loved it. The Z version is a different story. Great lens.

 

[Loaned Light]

Prior to this model 24-120, I owned two previous models; the F 24-120 f4G VR, and the first 24-120 (non VR). I hesitated buying this lens, because previous models image quality fell off noticeably at focal lengths above 70mm (the first 24-120), and 85mm ( 24-120 f4 G VR). I was kind of hoping that Nikon would follow their original lens plan and introduce a 24-105 f4, like the excellent Sigma and Canon renditions. I surmised (ha ha) that the shorter Zoom would give me excellent image quality throughout the range with only slight fall off at the longest end. But that is exactly what I get with the Z24-120 f4S.

I also expected the new model to have lens based VR and build quality on par with the Z 24-70 f4S. Wrong again... and again. I thought that a lens reaching out to 120mm would need lens based VR in addition to IBIS. It was a little disappointing that it didnt. Besides the Z6II, which has IBIS, I also own the Z fc which does not. I've used lens and camera setups for years that didn't have VR and / or IBIS, so not having VR was a luxury I could do without if I really want the lens. But it would've been nice to have that stabilizing mechanism for the smaller lighter camera.

The 24-70 f4S is a well built lens. While it feels cheap, it is actually a robust tool. However, its build quality pales when compared to its sibling, the Z 24-70 f2.8S. I fully expected the Z 24-120 f4S to have the same build quality as the 24-70 f4S. I was wrong to my happy surprise. Except for the lens OLED display, the Z 24-120, has the build quality of the 24-70 f2.8S. It has the same controls, such as L-fn, and function ring (useless), as well as the focus and zoom rings. However there is an inconsistency in the placement of those rings between Z lenses. On the longer zooms ( in my case the 100-400, and the 70-200 Zs), the zoom rings are closest to the front element, while on the the shorter Zooms (24-70S f2.8, and 24-120 Zs) it is the focus ring that is closest to the front element. On three of my zoom lenses, the Zoom ring is considerably the widest of the rings, but on the Z 24-70 f2.8S, while the Z ring is only slightly wider. So besides screwing with your muscle memory, Nikon also screws with your touch sensitivity. The Z24-120 also doesn't have a lens hood that locks in place and a button to unlock it, which the other three feature.

How does the Z 24-120 image quality compare to its predecessor, the 24-120 f4 G VR? In my opinion, the Z out classes the F model at every focal length, but especially at the longest and the widest lengths. It is no surprise that one can use most Z lenses wide open and still get sharp photos. It is also no surprise that image sharpness in the corners and edges hold their own, quite well. This lens is no exception. While it cannot compare to the Z 1.8 primes, for image quality or bokeh, it is not far off those marks. The Z24-120 f4 S is a convenience lens. It gives 7 marked focal lengths and every mm between 24mm and 120mm in one lens, and also gives you very good usable image quality through out its range. Are there issues? Sure. Bokeh isn't great, corners are sharp from 24-70mm but softer from 70-120. But in real usage, this lens is worth it.

I am quite unfamiliar hands on with this Z 24-120 F4 Lens Type, all F Mount Wides used are Prime up to 135mm, with the 70-200mm F4 as a regularly mounted lens on a DSLR.

I am now a Z9 user and have a Z100-400mm, I have a wish to know a little more about the Z24-100mm F4, especially to learn about how a Lens Collar might attach to it .

I want to add a Z 24-120 F4 to my Z Lens Collection, but would also like to use a Lens Collar on the Lens, even if a available model is needing to be modified to enable it to be used with the Lens.

I have not got any info' about the Z24-120 to allow me to assess it for the use with a Lens Collar.

To those who know the Z 24-120 quite well, does the lens seem like there is an option to adapt a Lens Collar to work with it ?

Thank You in advance for any thoughts shared.

John

 

[skyrunr]

No, unless you mounted it over a button, ring, or switch which I would not recommend doing so. You could probably give up the AF/M switch if you don't use a mount that is wider than the camera body.

@all Don't forget about the nice sun-stars this lens produces. (Hudson Henry)

 

[calvin83]

There is a product called "Atoll Lens Rotating Collar" on the market.

 

[NeedMorePractice]

Thanks for your review.

Since you own both this lens and the 24-70/2.8, when do you pick one over the other? And do you carry along both lenses all the time?

I'm not the OP, but I can throw in my experience, as I have both (plus the 24-70 f4).

The 24-70 2.8 gets used:

- when I need the highest image quality possible (mostly for professional work)

- when I know I'll be in darker situations requiring more light

- when I also have a longer lens with me, assuming I need more reach (typically the 70-200 2.8)

The 24-120 4 gets used:

- when I want the simplicity of a single-lens kit, which is often

- for more informal / casual shooting (family gatherings, walking around, occasionally for work and trips where top-level IQ isn't required)

- when I'm not sure I'll need a camera but want something handy just in case, whether for work or hobby

Bottom line: the 24-70 2.8 is ideal for lower light situations and when the best IQ is required, and it excels in these situation. The 24-120 is the most versatile lens I've ever used, though, and could get me by in most situations for both work and home. The only time I truly get nervous about having it as my only option for work situations is if I know the light won't be great. The IQ is marginally lower than the 24-70 2.8 but still plenty good enough for most (even professional) situations.

 

[ponyrojo]

I am seriously considering moving to the Z system, after shooting with my Nikon D610 for almost ten years now. As, such, I'm currently renting a Z6, and a 24-70 f/4 S lens.

While I am very impressed with the image quality of the 24-70 f/4 S, even now I can see where I would rather have the reach of the 24-120 f/4 S lens.

My question is, for anyone who owns both lenses, how does the image quality change between the two lenses?

Do you sacrifice anything for that extra reach out to 120mm?

 

[skyrunr]

If you review the MTF charts, the 24-120F4S has better image quality than the 24-70F4S. I suspect that the collapsible/compact design of the 24-70F4S came at a cost.

Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S Review - Page 4 of 6

The Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S has been one of the most highly anticipated Nikon mirrorless lenses yet - but it almost didn’t exist. In early versions of the Nikon Z roadmap, a 24-105mm was shown instead. Thankfully, Nikon scrapped that plan and eventually went with the 24-120mm design we have today.

photographylife.com

"Still, the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S navigates those balances quite well – and that’s its biggest strength. There are lighter lenses, sharper lenses, less expensive lenses, and longer zoom lenses. But almost nothing on the market performs as well on all those points at once as the 24-120mm f/4 S."

 

[Mach Schnell]

Pretty strong wording. A lot of people will disagree with you. Many use it for aperture control or exposure compensation.

 

[madecov]

I am seriously considering moving to the Z system, after shooting with my Nikon D610 for almost ten years now. As, such, I'm currently renting a Z6, and a 24-70 f/4 S lens.

While I am very impressed with the image quality of the 24-70 f/4 S, even now I can see where I would rather have the reach of the 24-120 f/4 S lens.

My question is, for anyone who owns both lenses, how does the image quality change between the two lenses?

Do you sacrifice anything for that extra reach out to 120mm?

The 24-120 is so much better than the 24-70 when you need 71-120mm.

Seriously though. I think the 24-120 has batter image quality that the 24-70. It just has a better rendering. Maybe I got a really good copy but I love the lens a lot.

 

[dcc2020]

I have both and I was already very impressed by the Z 24-70 F4, well the Z 24-120 F4 is better in IQ and goes up to 120. I was never a fan of the F mount 24-120, but the Z version is so much nicer. It also feels more like a pro lens. I won’t sell the 24-70 for it’s compact size, but if volume is not an issue I take the Z 24-120 anytime

 

[SoCalAngler]

I am seriously considering moving to the Z system, after shooting with my Nikon D610 for almost ten years now. As, such, I'm currently renting a Z6, and a 24-70 f/4 S lens.

While I am very impressed with the image quality of the 24-70 f/4 S, even now I can see where I would rather have the reach of the 24-120 f/4 S lens.

My question is, for anyone who owns both lenses, how does the image quality change between the two lenses?

Do you sacrifice anything for that extra reach out to 120mm?

I have both and haven't noticed any difference in IQ.

But I haven't looked very hard for any differences and I don't shoot test charts. I have shot a few fixed subject at different focal lengths at as close to the same distances as I could just to do a quick check out of the 24-120 when it first arrived. With the subject I chose I didnt notice any differences. But again I didn't spend a lot of effort looking.

Many reviewers and testers note some improvements with the 24-120 and some focal lengths and apertures over the 24-70. I have no reason to question their results. Those differences wouldn't make a difference to me in most situations.

What does make a difference is the 71-120mm focal lengths and a closer focusing distance for close up work.

So I do not feel that I have sacrificed anything

I kept the 24-70 because there are so many out there on the used market that they just don't command a decent price if selling, and the smaller form factor is useful to me sometimes. I also use it with extension tubes for macro stuff.

The 24-120 gets used now about 4x as much as the 24-70.

 

[cali92rs]

One thing to keep in mind too is that the maximum magnification of the 24-120 is .39x which means that you can get really nice subject isolation at the longer focal lengths and is also really nice for flowers, butterflies, bees etc where you don’t need a full 1:1 macro.
I took my 24-120mm and 14-30mm on a trip to Italy last summer. As much as I love it, I could’ve left the 14-30mm at home and not really miss much.



Even if I had the money for the 24-70 f2.8, I wouldn’t want to be without the 24-120 when traveling. The 71-120mm range is too important for my shooting.

 

[Ernie Misner]

Prior to this model 24-120, I owned two previous models; the F 24-120 f4G VR, and the first 24-120 (non VR). I hesitated buying this lens, because previous models image quality fell off noticeably at focal lengths above 70mm (the first 24-120), and 85mm ( 24-120 f4 G VR). I was kind of hoping that Nikon would follow their original lens plan and introduce a 24-105 f4, like the excellent Sigma and Canon renditions. I surmised (ha ha) that the shorter Zoom would give me excellent image quality throughout the range with only slight fall off at the longest end. But that is exactly what I get with the Z24-120 f4S.

I also expected the new model to have lens based VR and build quality on par with the Z 24-70 f4S. Wrong again... and again. I thought that a lens reaching out to 120mm would need lens based VR in addition to IBIS. It was a little disappointing that it didnt. Besides the Z6II, which has IBIS, I also own the Z fc which does not. I've used lens and camera setups for years that didn't have VR and / or IBIS, so not having VR was a luxury I could do without if I really want the lens. But it would've been nice to have that stabilizing mechanism for the smaller lighter camera.

The 24-70 f4S is a well built lens. While it feels cheap, it is actually a robust tool. However, its build quality pales when compared to its sibling, the Z 24-70 f2.8S. I fully expected the Z 24-120 f4S to have the same build quality as the 24-70 f4S. I was wrong to my happy surprise. Except for the lens OLED display, the Z 24-120, has the build quality of the 24-70 f2.8S. It has the same controls, such as L-fn, and function ring (useless), as well as the focus and zoom rings. However there is an inconsistency in the placement of those rings between Z lenses. On the longer zooms ( in my case the 100-400, and the 70-200 Zs), the zoom rings are closest to the front element, while on the the shorter Zooms (24-70S f2.8, and 24-120 Zs) it is the focus ring that is closest to the front element. On three of my zoom lenses, the Zoom ring is considerably the widest of the rings, but on the Z 24-70 f2.8S, while the Z ring is only slightly wider. So besides screwing with your muscle memory, Nikon also screws with your touch sensitivity. The Z24-120 also doesn't have a lens hood that locks in place and a button to unlock it, which the other three feature.

How does the Z 24-120 image quality compare to its predecessor, the 24-120 f4 G VR? In my opinion, the Z out classes the F model at every focal length, but especially at the longest and the widest lengths. It is no surprise that one can use most Z lenses wide open and still get sharp photos. It is also no surprise that image sharpness in the corners and edges hold their own, quite well. This lens is no exception. While it cannot compare to the Z 1.8 primes, for image quality or bokeh, it is not far off those marks. The Z24-120 f4 S is a convenience lens. It gives 7 marked focal lengths and every mm between 24mm and 120mm in one lens, and also gives you very good usable image quality through out its range. Are there issues? Sure. Bokeh isn't great, corners are sharp from 24-70mm but softer from 70-120. But in real usage, this lens is worth it.

I am quite unfamiliar hands on with this Z 24-120 F4 Lens Type, all F Mount Wides used are Prime up to 135mm, with the 70-200mm F4 as a regularly mounted lens on a DSLR.

I am now a Z9 user and have a Z100-400mm, I have a wish to know a little more about the Z24-100mm F4, especially to learn about how a Lens Collar might attach to it .

I want to add a Z 24-120 F4 to my Z Lens Collection, but would also like to use a Lens Collar on the Lens, even if a available model is needing to be modified to enable it to be used with the Lens.

I have not got any info' about the Z24-120 to allow me to assess it for the use with a Lens Collar.

To those who know the Z 24-120 quite well, does the lens seem like there is an option to adapt a Lens Collar to work with it ?

Are you looking for better balance on a tripod with a lens collar on the 24-120, or? Thanks.

Thank You in advance for any thoughts shared.

John

 

[Rich Rosen]

Thanks for your review.

Since you own both this lens and the 24-70/2.8, when do you pick one over the other? And do you carry along both lenses all the time?

Good question. If I’m doing a shoot, the 24-70 plus the 70-200 VR s. If I’m just slumming , the 24-120. The 24-120 is also my sideline lens for sports.

 

[Rich Rosen]

Pretty strong wording. A lot of people will disagree with you. Many use it for aperture control or exposure compensation.

Although the function ring on the 24-120 has better resistance to turning, it’s still a pain to use. Reason: one can inadvertently turn the ring, changing whatever setting you’ve assigned to it. To put it simply, Nikon should have put click stops on the function ring, giving feedback to the photographer, when purposefully, or inadvertently changes a setting. For me it’s useless.

 

[Rich Rosen]

Lens collars exist, because the weight of certain lenses can put a strain, on the lens mount , if not properly supported. The 24-120 is not such a lens.

 

[Rich Rosen]

Not much. Actually the z 24-70 f4S out performed the older F mount 24-120 f4G VR, only marginally. However, the z 24-120 is slightly sharper than the 24-70 f4 at comparable focal lengths. But, obviously the Z 24-120 has greater reach, so how does it perform from 70 to 120? The big knock on wide to tele zooms has always been that at the widest and longest focal lengths, image sharpness falls off considerably. With the Z24-120 f4S you’ll find that fall off does exist, but is imperceptible.

 

[Loaned Light]

Prior to this model 24-120, I owned two previous models; the F 24-120 f4G VR, and the first 24-120 (non VR). I hesitated buying this lens, because previous models image quality fell off noticeably at focal lengths above 70mm (the first 24-120), and 85mm ( 24-120 f4 G VR). I was kind of hoping that Nikon would follow their original lens plan and introduce a 24-105 f4, like the excellent Sigma and Canon renditions. I surmised (ha ha) that the shorter Zoom would give me excellent image quality throughout the range with only slight fall off at the longest end. But that is exactly what I get with the Z24-120 f4S.

I also expected the new model to have lens based VR and build quality on par with the Z 24-70 f4S. Wrong again... and again. I thought that a lens reaching out to 120mm would need lens based VR in addition to IBIS. It was a little disappointing that it didnt. Besides the Z6II, which has IBIS, I also own the Z fc which does not. I've used lens and camera setups for years that didn't have VR and / or IBIS, so not having VR was a luxury I could do without if I really want the lens. But it would've been nice to have that stabilizing mechanism for the smaller lighter camera.

The 24-70 f4S is a well built lens. While it feels cheap, it is actually a robust tool. However, its build quality pales when compared to its sibling, the Z 24-70 f2.8S. I fully expected the Z 24-120 f4S to have the same build quality as the 24-70 f4S. I was wrong to my happy surprise. Except for the lens OLED display, the Z 24-120, has the build quality of the 24-70 f2.8S. It has the same controls, such as L-fn, and function ring (useless), as well as the focus and zoom rings. However there is an inconsistency in the placement of those rings between Z lenses. On the longer zooms ( in my case the 100-400, and the 70-200 Zs), the zoom rings are closest to the front element, while on the the shorter Zooms (24-70S f2.8, and 24-120 Zs) it is the focus ring that is closest to the front element. On three of my zoom lenses, the Zoom ring is considerably the widest of the rings, but on the Z 24-70 f2.8S, while the Z ring is only slightly wider. So besides screwing with your muscle memory, Nikon also screws with your touch sensitivity. The Z24-120 also doesn't have a lens hood that locks in place and a button to unlock it, which the other three feature.

How does the Z 24-120 image quality compare to its predecessor, the 24-120 f4 G VR? In my opinion, the Z out classes the F model at every focal length, but especially at the longest and the widest lengths. It is no surprise that one can use most Z lenses wide open and still get sharp photos. It is also no surprise that image sharpness in the corners and edges hold their own, quite well. This lens is no exception. While it cannot compare to the Z 1.8 primes, for image quality or bokeh, it is not far off those marks. The Z24-120 f4 S is a convenience lens. It gives 7 marked focal lengths and every mm between 24mm and 120mm in one lens, and also gives you very good usable image quality through out its range. Are there issues? Sure. Bokeh isn't great, corners are sharp from 24-70mm but softer from 70-120. But in real usage, this lens is worth it.

I am quite unfamiliar hands on with this Z 24-120 F4 Lens Type, all F Mount Wides used are Prime up to 135mm, with the 70-200mm F4 as a regularly mounted lens on a DSLR.

I am now a Z9 user and have a Z100-400mm, I have a wish to know a little more about the Z24-100mm F4, especially to learn about how a Lens Collar might attach to it .

I want to add a Z 24-120 F4 to my Z Lens Collection, but would also like to use a Lens Collar on the Lens, even if a available model is needing to be modified to enable it to be used with the Lens.

I have not got any info' about the Z24-120 to allow me to assess it for the use with a Lens Collar.

To those who know the Z 24-120 quite well, does the lens seem like there is an option to adapt a Lens Collar to work with it ?

Thank You in advance for any thoughts shared.

John

Thank You for the Posts that have supported this inquiry.

To add a little further insight, I have a Z9 Body > Z Lens connection that is loose and I have carried out a Modification using a ancillary to rigidly couple the Body/Lens.

I am wanting to utilise this ancillary with all Z Lenses that are to be purchased.

The Z 24-120 F4 will be lens No2 as a purchase.