xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Have any of you used this lens? Nikon 24-120mm f/4

I'm thinking of getting it with a D-750.

Sigma 24-105mm or 24-70 is another option.


Thanks for your input.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

I researched off and on for the last couple of months on just these lenses and similar. The one thing I did really want was stabilization. But, even besides that, I ended up with the Sigma 24-105. I have a few other Sigma lenses and love them. I also like that I can fine tune (calibrate) if need be, using the USB dock.
The Nikon 24-70 2.8 came out on top in most areas (not all) but, not nearly enough to justify the price for me personally.

I eliminated the Nikon 24-120 fairly quickly for various reasons, mainly IQ wasn't as good as it should have been for the price. Even though I found quite a few new ones at half price that were taken from a kit, which tempted me some.
I even considered the Tamron 24-70 2.8 but, decided on the Sigma. I didn't base my decision on price but, it was a nice plus anyway.

In order, from all the research I did, from many, many sources, especially hands on comparisons with example shots.

1st-Nikon 24-70 f2.8 (almost $1,900) Pricey but, hard to beat overall.
2nd-Sigma 24-105 ($900) f4 best balance of price, build quality, features, IQ and a bit more reach.
3rd-Tamron 24-70 f2.8 ($1,300) Good overall in most departments including IQ and the price isn't too bad for a fast lens.
4th-Nikon 24-120 f4 ($1,300) Didn't seem to live up to the list price. IQ was lacking at most focal lengths, build quality not that great. Lots and lots of these are available on ebay and Amazon for about half price ($650) NEW.....I suppose that there's a reason for that.

Each on of these lenses has their strong points and weak points. For my personal needs and wants, the Sigma 24-105 won out.

I haven't even received my lens yet and I have no first hand experience with any of the others. I am only passing along some of my findings since I spent so much time and brain cells researching.

So, I believe the first three on the list are worth taking a closer look at to decide what's most important to you in a lens.

I hope this helps at least a little deciding what to take a closer look at anyway :wink:

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Thanks very much. It helps a great deal.
So many options. It can get overwhelming trying to
figure it out.

I have a Sigma 17-70 that I use on my 7100
most of the time. It's a great lens for me.

I really want the first on your list.
Nikon 24-70 f2.8, but its hard to justify that kind of money.

I'm getting the D-750. While the Sigma 24-105mm Art is a great value, there is a Nikon package with the D750 and the 24-120mm f/4 which basically has the lens costing $700, less than the Sigma. Most reviews say these two lenses were closely comparable in quality.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Yup! That's kind of where I was at on being overwhelmed and the 2.8 thing.

There are some youtube videos , that put some of these very lenses head to head in various aspects.

I've watched so many comparisons, done so much reading, looked at lots of sample images and read until my brain hurt then, did it again and again;)

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Sounds like were in the same boat.
It's the package deal that makes it hard to choose.
$700 less is considerable.
Thanks for sharing what you have studied with me.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

No problem. It's good that someone else might benefit from all that work :wink:

Just having a direction to get started in, is half the battle :-)

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Great lens, don't own one but have used them frequently on rental/borrow. I think it is better than the 24-105 which I looked at and dismissed, and not as good as the 24-70, which I do own.

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Thanks for your input Gene.
That's a pretty sweet deal when you buy the camera
and lens as a combo.

Renting them is probably a good way to decide too.
I'm looking at the Tamron 70-200mm too.

Photosmoke

I have the 24-120mm Nikon lens, and am quite happy with it 2.8 version. I picked it up on ebay very cheap, it's a little beat up but works fine. I also have a D750 which I love. I have a Tam 70-200 an older version no vc , but still a very good lens especially at the price.

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Thanks Photosmoke.
Glad your enjoying your lenses.
I don't look for used. I should do that.

Photosmoke

I don't usually either, but when I saw this lens for 250.00 on ebay in perfect working order I decided to take a chance , luckily it turned out good works great

Frank47 Loc: West coast Florida

I bought the 24-120 f4 with the D750 as a package and have been very pleased with the results. It has terrific color rendition and sharpness that is better than critics give it credit for. With the amazing low light capability of the D750, the f4 has not been a problem.

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Thanks Frank. Glad your enjoying it.
That's what I have heard too.
The 750's low light capability makes up for the f/4.
It's a pretty good deal when you buy then together.
Big savings.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

Nothing beats hands on, practical, real life experience:thumbup:

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Please let me know how you like your new lens.

Sigma has really up'd their game in the last 5 years.
So has Tamron. I was going to get Sigmas 70-200
but changed my mind when I discovered that the
Tamron 70-200 is 3 years newer.

Seems like every year they just keep getting better.