Railfan Technology > Anybody using the Nikon 24-120 f/4 lens?

I am thinking of getting the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Lens. Is anybody using this lens and if so what is your opinion, good or bad on it. Thanks in advance for your help and opinions.
Wes

Wes Chiles
Topeka, KS

I've got one. I find the lens to be versatile and
the VR is great. The lens is acceptably sharp given
its great range of 24-120, and I'd buy another. The
one I have was purchased as 'refurbished' for about
half the cost of the new lens. This lens would be
great for video work.

You might want to rent one for a few days to see how
you like it. I use mine on my D600 and D300.

John.

It got pretty mediocre review at DxO Mark tests. I'd test the copy if I was going to buy one and decide if it's good enough. It certainly ISN'T good enough on the new D850. It's good enough on APS-C sensors.

I have one for my full frame D800 and D810 bodies. The Nikon 24-70 is sharper especially on the edges but the extra 50mm range is extremely useful for railfan applications. Most railroad images have bushes, trees and distant images on the edges.

If you are using a crop sensor camera buy a Nikon 16-85 lens for essentially the same perspective.

Don't be afraid to buy the 24-120 f4, you will find that is the lens you will go to more than 90% of the time.

fbe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have one for my full frame D800 and D810 bodies.
> The Nikon 24-70 is sharper especially on the edges
> but the extra 50mm range is extremely useful for
> railfan applications. Most railroad images have
> bushes, trees and distant images on the edges.
>
> If you are using a crop sensor camera buy a Nikon
> 16-85 lens for essentially the same perspective.
>
> Don't be afraid to buy the 24-120 f4, you will
> find that is the lens you will go to more than 90%
> of the time.


I agree with fbe. Mine came as part of the 810 package
and I've found it performs just fine.

Be Well,

Tim Colbert K3HX

It's a fair performer and the focal length is very, very handy, I used mine 90% of the time on my D800 until I discovered it's weaknesses. For critical applications it's not the sharpest but sharp enough for railfans. If you do any enlarging of the image this becomes apparent. If you like to shoot at night this is not the lens for you. Low light focusing is fair and not always right on the money. If you do any kind of time exposures the focus system will creep or waffle back and forth very slightly to cause a unacceptably soft or blurry image. Switching the lens to manual and turning auto focus off on both the lens and camera body will not prevent this. Running everything in full manual does not alleviate this problem. I've lost some great one of a kind images due to this. This creep problem has been written up in several reviews and tests (which I found after I bought the lens). Trips to Nikon for repair did not fix the problem and was told off the record that it is an inherent problem.

I hated to shelve the lens since it's focal length was so handy and the VR was very good, but wound up investing in the 24-70 f2.8 which has been an excellent performer. It's super-sharp, works extremely well in low light and locks and holds its focus during long exposures. I was unhappy that it didn't have VR but I have never missed it and it was well worth the extra money even though I do miss the extra magnification. The 24-70 2.8 should have been my first purchase.

Tom Kline
Houston

The Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 pre-VR lens is a "God" lens - one of the best ever made (hope to get one some day). There seems to be a general consensus that the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 G VR lens, although light and small, is actually a very colorful, sharp lens. Not quite as long as the 24-120 but pretty good range, new ones are $500.

Tom Trent
Eugene, OR

I have one with my D750 and use it all the time for general purpose photography. At night I use prime lenses.


What I read the major cause of lack of sharpness is camera shake not lens sharpness so in lower, not low light, I think the VR feature is a good trade-off for hand held.

Bob Jordan

lilwes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am thinking of getting the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR
> 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Lens. Is anybody using this
> lens and if so what is your opinion, good or bad
> on it. Thanks in advance for your help and
> opinions.
> Wes

You didn't mention whether your Nikon is an FX or DX, but I've been using one for almost four years with a D7100. The 36-180mm APS-C equivalent covers a comfortable range for most raifanning subjects that I have encountered, and it was demonstrably superior to the DX kit lenses of the day. The constant f4 is a plus, and I've been very pleased with the image quality it produces. Short of renting one, consider buying from a retailer with an acceptable return policy (e.g., B&H) if you're not happy with your purchase. Good luck!    

I'm going to beat this one to death because
I was interested in the lens, but was hesitant
for two reasons: I had the older 3.5-5.6 version,
and it sucked on a digi camera, and I too had
read poor reviews of the lens.

Here are two that I snapped yesterday with the
f4.0 version of the lens on my ancient D300.
The lens is sharp enough on a sunny day with the
light coming over one's right shoulder, and it
even works in shade at ISO 3200 when snapping
grand kids inside (It's a two-fer lens.)

For rivet counting, one really wants a prime
lens in the normal to short tele range (for
35 mm full frame, that's 50 to 85) mounted on a
decent fullframe camera, with said camera
being tightly fixed to a good tripod.

John.

---

---

I too have good things to say about the 24-120. Yes it is f/4 but for daylight use it is a nice medium use lens. Even at night with an ISO boost on my D810 I am very happy with it. I do have several primes and a BIG-HEAVY 28-300.

Mine is sharp as a tack! I use it or an 85mm f 1.8 almost exclusively on my FX format camera.

Steve Sloan
San Jose, CA