Z DX 18-140 VR or Z 24-120/4 S

[jabatama]

I would like to buy a new lens for my Zfc.



I’m between Z DX 18-140 VR or FF Z 24-120/4 S … I know they are for two different body sensor sizes, but I have the desire to try that.



I’m after a possible faster AF, better IQ like color rendition, contrast, sharpness corner-to-corner, crispness (if there is a such thing).



I’m not buying a Z FF body at this time, so I’ll use my Zfc for now.



Z 24-120/4 S is heavier, more expensive, doesn’t have VR, sealed.

Z DX 18-140 VR is lighter, cheaper, has VR, not sealed.



Will I see a significant difference in the overall IQ with Z 24-120/4 S ?

Can the VR alone tip the scale towards Z DX 18-140 ?

How important is the VR in the lens ?



If I buy Z 24-120/4 S this may lead me down the road to buy a Z FF body

I would appreciate your advise.

 

[sirhawkeye64]

I would like to buy a new lens for my Zfc.

I’m between Z DX 18-140 VR or FF Z 24-120/4 S … I know they are for two different body sensor sizes, but I have the desire to try that.

I’m after a possible faster AF, better IQ like color rendition, contrast, sharpness corner-to-corner, crispness (if there is a such thing).

I’m not buying a Z FF body at this time, so I’ll use my Zfc for now.

Z 24-120/4 S is heavier, more expensive, doesn’t have VR, sealed.

Z DX 18-140 VR is lighter, cheaper, has VR, not sealed.

Will I see a significant difference in the overall IQ with Z 24-120/4 S ?

Can the VR alone tip the scale towards Z DX 18-140 ?

How important is the VR in the lens ?

If I buy Z 24-120/4 S this may lead me down the road to buy a Z FF body

I would appreciate your advise.

I would get the 18-140 since it has VR and the Zfc doesn't have IBIS. The 24-120 does not VR and I would say I;d rather get a lens with it at that focal length than not have it if the camera doesn't have IBIS. Now if this was a Z5 or something, then it wouldn't matter and I'd say get the 24-120. But on the DX cameras ,get the lenses with VR over the full frame lenses without it. The only reason to get the Z 24-120 would be if you planned to move to FF at some point and if you want a bit more sharpness, but otherwise I don't see a huge reason to go that route for a Zfc.

 

[shuncheung]

I would like to buy a new lens for my Zfc.

I’m between Z DX 18-140 VR or FF Z 24-120/4 S … I know they are for two different body sensor sizes, but I have the desire to try that.

I’m after a possible faster AF, better IQ like color rendition, contrast, sharpness corner-to-corner, crispness (if there is a such thing).

I’m not buying a Z FF body at this time, so I’ll use my Zfc for now.

Z 24-120/4 S is heavier, more expensive, doesn’t have VR, sealed.

Z DX 18-140 VR is lighter, cheaper, has VR, not sealed.

Will I see a significant difference in the overall IQ with Z 24-120/4 S ?

Can the VR alone tip the scale towards Z DX 18-140 ?

How important is the VR in the lens ?

If I buy Z 24-120/4 S this may lead me down the road to buy a Z FF body

I would appreciate your advise.

I would get the 18-140 since it has VR and the Zfc doesn't have IBIS. The 24-120 does not VR and I would say I;d rather get a lens with it at that focal length than not have it if the camera doesn't have IBIS. Now if this was a Z5 or something, then it wouldn't matter and I'd say get the 24-120. But on the DX cameras ,get the lenses with VR over the full frame lenses without it. The only reason to get the Z 24-120 would be if you planned to move to FF at some point and if you want a bit more sharpness, but otherwise I don't see a huge reason to go that route for a Zfc.

VR (one lens has in-lens optical VR and another doesn't) is a good point. Additionally, IMO 24-120 would be an odd zoom range on a DX body, as the wide end is not sufficiently wide.

The 24-120mm/f4 S happens to be a great lens, but unless the OP has plans to add an FX Z body in the near future, using a 24-120 on a DX body is not ideal. I wouldn't buy lenses too far in advance either. If the OP may add an FX body in 2, 3 years, additional lens options, potentially better or better deals, may appear in the mean time.

 

[hashsomeKnoppers]

I would also consider the 24-200 FF lens.

 

[Bob A L]

My personal opinion only is that for Nikon DX mirrorless, the 18-140 is the only choice here. The lack of VR on the 24-120, along with the lack of DX wide angle coverage, and less telephoto coverage is plenty of reason for me. But the other reason is that the 18-140Z lens is fantastic as far as image quality. It is so good to be almost unbelievable. Physical size and weight combined with the image quality it is capable of producing make it almost a must have lens if you have a DX Nikon mirrorless. Also, 18-140 is a full inch shorter and 1/2 the weight of the 24-120.

- I have no fear of using my 18-140 almost exclusively as I can easily crop to the same field of view provided by the 50-250 with perfectly satisfactory results. - End of personal opinion.

 

[rangel28]

I would like to buy a new lens for my Zfc.

I’m between Z DX 18-140 VR or FF Z 24-120/4 S … I know they are for two different body sensor sizes, but I have the desire to try that.

I’m after a possible faster AF, better IQ like color rendition, contrast, sharpness corner-to-corner, crispness (if there is a such thing).

I’m not buying a Z FF body at this time, so I’ll use my Zfc for now.

Z 24-120/4 S is heavier, more expensive, doesn’t have VR, sealed.

Z DX 18-140 VR is lighter, cheaper, has VR, not sealed.

Will I see a significant difference in the overall IQ with Z 24-120/4 S ?

Can the VR alone tip the scale towards Z DX 18-140 ?

How important is the VR in the lens ?

If I buy Z 24-120/4 S this may lead me down the road to buy a Z FF body

I would appreciate your advise.

I would buy the DX 18mm-140mm lens for a DX body. You probably won't see any difference in in IQ unless you pixel peep and even then you may not see any difference. It has VR. Additionally, it's lighter and built to fit a DX body. While not heavy, the Z 24mm-120mm is heavier and more solidly built, so it may feel less balanced on a Z fc.

I had no plans to buy the Z 18mm-140mm lens, since I already had the two kit lenses, but bought it when Amazon ran one of their sales (for some reason it was 27 percent off). It practically lives on my Z30 and I;m always amazed at the sharpness and clarity I get from this lens.

 

[Ryan Schwartz]

I agree with the others to get the DX glass. One, it has VR, and two, it will be better balanced on the Z fc.

 

[shuncheung]

I would also consider the 24-200 FF lens.

The 24-200 has VR; that is one advantage over the 24-120/4. On a DX body, once again the wide end is not all that wide but the long end enters super tele range. Only the OP can determine whether that is the right range.

 

[Bob A L]

Nikon has just opened up a new refurbished sale and has the Z mount 18-140 for $316.75, - That's about a $100 less than used ones are selling for. Don't let it slip by if you are considering.

 

[George 68]

If this is helpful, I have both lenses you are considering and have never used the 24-120 on my DX camera.

Personally, I find the 18mm (27mm equivalent) of the 18-140 already lacking a bit of width so the 36mm equivalent of the 24-120 wouldn't work for me.

In terms of the sharpness, colour rendition etc., only you can decide, so here's a handheld shot to scrutinize. It was taken at 1/250s so camera shake shouldn't be an issue.

 

[mosswings]

I would like to buy a new lens for my Zfc.

I’m between Z DX 18-140 VR or FF Z 24-120/4 S … I know they are for two different body sensor sizes, but I have the desire to try that.

I’m after a possible faster AF, better IQ like color rendition, contrast, sharpness corner-to-corner, crispness (if there is a such thing).

I’m not buying a Z FF body at this time, so I’ll use my Zfc for now.

Z 24-120/4 S is heavier, more expensive, doesn’t have VR, sealed.

Z DX 18-140 VR is lighter, cheaper, has VR, not sealed.

Will I see a significant difference in the overall IQ with Z 24-120/4 S ?

Can the VR alone tip the scale towards Z DX 18-140 ?

How important is the VR in the lens ?

If I buy Z 24-120/4 S this may lead me down the road to buy a Z FF body

I would appreciate your advise.

Another vote for the 18-140. VR becomes more important the greater the focal length, but, like IBIS, is useful at ALL focal lengths. Not having VR in a zoom lens is a big disadvantage for general hand-held use. IQ-wise the 18-140 is no slouch. It is optically better than the f-mount 18-140, lighter, and more compact. It is well balanced to the DX Z bodies and is about as long and as heavy a lens as those very compact bodies should mount. Its biggest shortcoming is that it really should go wider, something like 16-140, to be a comprehensive all-in-one zoom solution for today's photography, but Nikon likes to make these DX convenience zooms start at 18mms. I guess it saves on optical elements.

The 24-120 is a superb FF lens but it's really only intended for the FX bodies with IBIS. It is Nikon's classic stepup walkaround lens that goes from a mild ultrawide to moderate tele. The equivalent in DX would be a 16-80, only available in f-mount and clumsy on the Zfc as you have to use a FTZ adapter.

The 24-200 superzoom is a surprisingly good FF superzoom that could work but it's a big burrito of a lens on the Zfc. And it's also is not wide enough for general DX photography.

Bottom line, for a Z DX camera you really don't have much of a choice, and cost wise it's a no brainer - 18-140.

 

[jabatama]

It seems the consensus is for Z 18-140 DX VR ….

however if the mythical Z50 ii comes out with an effective IBIS, then will the Z FX 24-120/4 S be a good choice in that new mythical body ?

 

[Paul Pasco]

What lenses do you have now? I have the 16-50, the 50-250 and the 24/1.7. I have had a 18-135 for my various DSLRs for years and it is a good range for all in one. Of the two lenses you ask about, I would pick the 18-140 because of the VR and the wider range.

 

[Bob A L]

It would not for me as it would have less telephoto available, no wide angle coverage, was heavier and longer considering use on my DX sensor cameras. If I used FF sensor cameras the decision might be different slanting towards the 24-120.

 

[shuncheung]

It seems the consensus is for Z 18-140 DX VR ….

however if the mythical Z50 ii comes out with an effective IBIS, then will the Z FX 24-120/4 S be a good choice in that new mythical body ?

On DX, 140mm is like 210mm on FX type magnification, and 120mm on DX is like 180mm. All Nikkor Z FX lenses that reaches 200mm or longer have in-lens VR. I think you are still better off with VR in the lens.

Personally, I wouldn't count on any Z50ii. The camera market has shrunk and Nikon, like everybody else, is introducing new cameras on a much slower pace. We are in late 2024 already; so far in this calendar year we have only one new body: Z6iii and three lenses, which happen to be all non-S: 28-400 and the two f1.4, 35mm and 50mm. If you are expecting any new body, be prepared to wait a long time and what features will be on it is difficult to predict.

Again, for the 24-120 on DX, IMO the main issue is that the wide end is not very wide. 24mm is great on FX, but not so wide on DX.

 

[Mizar11]

It seems the consensus is for Z 18-140 DX VR ….

however if the mythical Z50 ii comes out with an effective IBIS, then will the Z FX 24-120/4 S be a good choice in that new mythical body ?

Even if the next (if there is a next) DX body has IBIS, that won't make the 24-120 any wider in FL . . .

But the question is what focal lengths are the majority of your keepers. If you are consistently in the 18mm range (which I am) then the 24-120 is just the wrong tool.

 

[sirhawkeye64]

It seems the consensus is for Z 18-140 DX VR ….

however if the mythical Z50 ii comes out with an effective IBIS, then will the Z FX 24-120/4 S be a good choice in that new mythical body ?

I would maybe wait if you can -- perhaps until the end of Nov. Rumor is there may be a another Nikon camera coming before the end of the year and some are speculating some time in November. Possibly an APSC? However if you only plan to stay in APSC, then go ahead as it won't matter then, it would work fine, and even with a body with IBIS, at 18-140 on DX, you're gonna want in-lens VR anyway (IBIS is less effective at longer FLs).

--
PLEASE NOTE: I usually unsubscribe from forums and comments after a period of time, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. Feel free to PM me if you have a questions or need clarification about a comment I made.

 

[mrbr]

I would like to buy a new lens for my Zfc.

I’m between Z DX 18-140 VR or FF Z 24-120/4 S … I know they are for two different body sensor sizes, but I have the desire to try that.

I’m after a possible faster AF, better IQ like color rendition, contrast, sharpness corner-to-corner, crispness (if there is a such thing).

I’m not buying a Z FF body at this time, so I’ll use my Zfc for now.

Z 24-120/4 S is heavier, more expensive, doesn’t have VR, sealed.

Z DX 18-140 VR is lighter, cheaper, has VR, not sealed.

Will I see a significant difference in the overall IQ with Z 24-120/4 S ?

Can the VR alone tip the scale towards Z DX 18-140 ?

How important is the VR in the lens ?

For zoom tele lenses very important.

If I buy Z 24-120/4 S this may lead me down the road to buy a Z FF body

Then IMO don't wait if your budget allows it and make the jump now and buy a Z5 or Z6 with the 24-120 f4 lens as a kit. Or stay with dx and go for the 18-140 z dx lens.

There will be (or are already) nikon price reductions. Maybe look for an opportunity to buy at reduced prices.

I would appreciate your advise.

--
Greetings,
Marc

 

[monte12345]

This is a case where using a tripod becomes critical. Because you wont see the true quality of the 24-120 if you don't use a tripod to get it's full benefit at low ISO settings. In body IBIS is why Nikon didn't provide VR in this lens and it's an important factor for getting the best IQ this lens can provide. Basically if you don't have IBIS use a tripod.

You are sort of at a tipping point with these two lenses and if you don't want to carry a tripod with you the VR equipped DX lens is the best choice.

PS; If you are a fan of bargains that border on hard to believe Nikon has the Z5 kit with 24-50mm f4-6.3 refurbished on sale for 899.95 and this sale does end today and currently it's in stock. Link below

Nikon Z 5 | Refurbished Camera | Nikon USA

The Nikon Z 5 is a 24.3 MP full frame mirrorless camera designed for ease of use, perfect for entry-level photographers. Shop Nikon's official store!

www.nikonusa.com

 

[jabatama]

What lenses do you have now? I have the 16-50, the 50-250 and the 24/1.7. I have had a 18-135 for my various DSLRs for years and it is a good range for all in one. Of the two lenses you ask about, I would pick the 18-140 because of the VR and the wider range.

Currently I have 16-50, Viltrox 23/1.4 ( love that lens), Z 24/1.7 DX, Z 50-250 DX.