Which is the better value? Nikon 24-120 F4 or the Nikon 24-120 F3.5-5.6 & tell me why
May 21, 2019 17:33:17 #
rjaywallace wrote:
Prime lens vs. a slower zoom lens. If you are still confused, look up the definition of “prime lens” and “faster lens” and compare those two with the definitions of “zoom lens” and “slower lens”.
I am not confused about the meaning of "prime lens" but I think you are. A prime lens is one of a fixed focal length (see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_lens) You are confusing prime lens and one of variable aperture.
May 21, 2019 17:43:17 #
Architect1776 wrote:
You can easily manually set the aperture on G lenses if you know how to.
Perhaps only hobbyists know how.
Perhaps only hobbyists know how.
Well, I'm only a hobbyist and I don't know how without an aperture ring on the lens barrel. But then, it's never been a problem for me.
May 21, 2019 18:01:16 #
Bill P wrote:
Wow, this place is full of the same people that th... (show quote)
The f4 is not the only version that has vibration reduction (vr). This is probably why the (3.5- about 5.6 vr) seems to get a bad rap. The original 24-120 did not have vr. It was soft but got the job done for the newspaper industry. It was referred to as the street sweeper. Pictures in newsprint didn't have to be sharp as long as it told the story. I own the second version and still use it and it is a vr and its not the f4. As I previously stated I also own the 24-85 3.5-4.5 vr and its a better lens, but doesn't have the range.
May 21, 2019 18:30:31 #
The F4 lens by far!. It is considered a "pro" lens by Nikon, albeit a cheaper one because of the minimum aperture is only F4. I have this lens and have compared it to the Nikon 24-70 2.8 lens and it is nearly as sharp. It's a great "walk around" lens and you can usually pick them up used on B&H for around $700. I bought mine used off of Craigslist.
May 21, 2019 19:08:20 #
therwol
Loc: USA
LMurray wrote:
In 40 some years never heard prime defined quite that way. It's always been prime fixed format, zoom multiple. Not semantics because two different things not two words for the same or similar.
Two meanings of prime lens. Fixed focal length is the newer meaning, and you see it used all the time in print.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_lens
May 21, 2019 19:13:02 #
RichinSeattle wrote:
Well, I'm only a hobbyist and I don't know how without an aperture ring on the lens barrel. But then, it's never been a problem for me.
Canon never did have one on the EF lenses for over 30 years and Nikon has recently done the same.
The manual aperture ring (control) is on the body but manually controls the aperture by physical manipulation sending the signal to the lens.
May 21, 2019 20:15:24 #
missiletracker
Loc: Paupack Pa
Check the many reviews that have analyzed both lens. The f/4 is by far the better lens. I am switching from Canon to Nikon Z7 and researching the best nikon lens since there are few z lens released. I just bought the 24-120 f/4 G zoom listed as excellent this morning on ebay for $266 with an additioonal $30 for a ebay warranty. They are going fairly cheaply used. If you buy used, make sure there is a good return policy.
May 21, 2019 20:43:34 #
therwol
Loc: USA
billnikon wrote:
As far as VALUE goes, and only value, the 3.5-5.6 is a better value if your not going to use it full time. I have seen many on ebay far less than $250.00.
You have to factor in results to determine value. Cheaper isn't necessarily more valuable. The 3.5-5.6 is an inferior lens to anyone who has tested both and reported the results.
I replace my 28-105 AF D with the f/4 lens. The 28-105 was a kit lens back in the day. The newer lens is more versatile in having a wider zoom range, but in my personal experience, up to around 85mm, it is not sharper than the ancient lens and has far more distortion. In fact, I find the old lens to be sharper. Nevertheless, I felt limited by the zoom range and lack of VR.
May 21, 2019 22:48:16 #
Well in my case,,,,I had the F/4...just about one of the worst lens I ever owned. Glad I was able to sell it. But that is just me...
May 21, 2019 23:06:45 #
I was surprised to hear of the awful f4 lens prior contributor had. While it may not be the very best lens made by Nikkor, I have heard few complaints as severe as was his.
I, as have many other contributors, have had better luck. I hope anyone else buying this lens has a better experience.
I, as have many other contributors, have had better luck. I hope anyone else buying this lens has a better experience.
May 22, 2019 00:12:21 #
FYI... In looking up lens reviews I stumbled across this ad. New Nikon lens with open box pricing. Looks like a darn good deal. I do not need another lens but would buy this if I did!! Someone will get lucky.
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-24-120mm-f-4G-ED-VR-Lens/939895531?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=4720&adid=22222222227274445318&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=329498393467&wl4=pla-623630867666&wl5=9031634&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=114233243&wl11=online&wl12=939895531&wl13=&veh=sem&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI-tre4Z-u4gIVdh-tBh25fAsREAkYBCABEgIDm_D_BwE
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-24-120mm-f-4G-ED-VR-Lens/939895531?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=4720&adid=22222222227274445318&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=329498393467&wl4=pla-623630867666&wl5=9031634&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=114233243&wl11=online&wl12=939895531&wl13=&veh=sem&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI-tre4Z-u4gIVdh-tBh25fAsREAkYBCABEgIDm_D_BwE
May 22, 2019 00:36:02 #
rjaywallace wrote:
Prime lens vs. a slower zoom lens. If you are still confused, look up the definition of “prime lens” and “faster lens” and compare those two with the definitions of “zoom lens” and “slower lens”.
Why can't you Simply Answer his question and not be such a such a snarky p****
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.