Bob Evans posted ...

24-70 f2.8 or 24-120 f4

24-70 f2.8 or 24-120 f4

Category: Lens Talk

Posted: 01-7-11 11:10 AM - Views: 8567

By: Bob Evans

Back to post list


Share this topic with your colleagues

Start of discussion

I'm itchin' to spend my Christmas bonus, and I just can't decide on the 24-70 f2.8 or the newly released version of the 24-120 f4.
I admit, I'm leaning towards the 24-70, as EVERY review I've seen on it is very positive. It seems to be a proven lens.
However, the flexibility of the 24-120 is very appealing. I've got the older 24-120, and it's definitely a disappointing lens. The newer f4 VRII version is supposed to be an improvement.
Anybody who has both of these lenses have an opinion? IS the 24-70 really that much better optically to justify the additional $$$, and the shorter tele length?
I'd be using it on a D700, and I would like to be sure that the lens I use is good enough to get professional results (even if my skills aren't there yet!!)
Thanks All - Love this site!!


Reply from Roberto Schettini on 12-3-12 9:41 AM

I have used both. The 24/70 is a great lens, but very heavy. I prefer now de 24/120, more range and the image quality have no differences. Agree with the prime lenses.... those are always the best choice.
Reply from Frank Wollinger on 10-17-12 10:54 AM

24 -70 is my favorite lens for eventphotography. its sharp and bokeh at 2,8 is top.
Reply from Jaime Dormer on 02-1-11 4:43 AM


I have a 24-70mm f/2.8 on a D700, you can't go past it, it is worth every dollar, so sharp you will measure every other lens against it, buy it.

Reply from Nikon Images on 01-22-11 11:00 AM

Congrats! Can't wait to see your pictures :)
Reply from Mofeed Qasem on 01-22-11 4:30 AM

I just bought this lens 24~70mm Nikkor, it rules and looks great on camera body as well and makes people's eyes pop!!! Great shots and crisp pictures!
Reply from Zach Blake on 01-7-11 10:39 PM

Events as in concert like "dark stuff"? f2,8 isn't that great and with a D700 you can make up for the f4 with high ISO and pick up the extra range.

But, I'd get a fast prime like an f1,4 50mm and call it good. You can always crop if necessary. There's really no difference between f4 and f2,8 on a D700 or Ds/D3s from what I've seen.

For the size of the f2,8 zooms, I'd carry a bag of primes any day.

Just my $0.02...
Reply from Nikon Images on 01-7-11 1:40 PM

Well, the 24-70 is a real winner as far as performance and optical quality. I have read some stories regarding issues that some have experienced. My only suggestion is to buy it new if the difference between used and new is just one or two hundred dollars.
Reply from Bob Evans on 01-7-11 12:46 PM

Thanks for your input, Zeiss Man.
Primes aren't really the way for me, as I do a fair amount of event type photography. I've been doing it so far with a D200/D300 matched with the 18-200, and 16-85 DX lenses.
But, I've recently been bitten with the FX bug, love my D700 with the Sigma 70-200 f2.8
I just couldn't swing the nikon 70-200 at the time, but the Sigma has turned out to be a great option.
I want this to be my 2nd "real" lens for the D700.......
Reply from Nikon Images on 01-7-11 12:02 PM

Hard call. The 24-70 is a big lens and very good. But would you be better off with a prime? Do you need the entire range? What type of photography do you think you may do most of. I had the 24-70 at one time and loved it but decided that primes were the way for me. However, you need a larger bag and they get heavy after a while. Hard choice.
Please login to post or reply