So sánh nikon 24-70 va 24-120 năm 2024

Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

Jul 22, 2021

Just curious to hear from folks that have first hand experience comparing these 2 lenses.

Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D +2 more

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to bizmord • Jul 22, 2021

You have not said which 24-70 f2.8. I presume you mean an F mount version.

I also presume you mean the current version of the 24-120.

Depending on the shooting situation the 24-120 has an extremely flexible and convenient zoom range, and either 24-70 has a higher price, wider aperture and better optics.

Nikon gives you choices - you choose!

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.

Nikon Z9 Nikon Z8 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II +22 more

I have

In reply to bizmord • Jul 22, 2021

4

Depending on the models you mean, of each lens.

I bought a 24-120 F4 to use on motorcycle trips, in place of my 24-70g. I figured the extra focal range would be useful in a near-one-lens situation. (I keep an 80-400 in one of the bags, but that means a more significant stop to get the lens out and use it.

I used the 24-120 F4 for one trip. In post-processing the images, I felt frustrated that landscapes were taking so much more post-processing to try to sharpen up details, compared to the 24-70g. I put the 24-120F4 on the shelf.

It's not a huge difference, like most lens issues these days. But it's there, and the 24-70vr (which I also have) would be even better for landscapes.

Here is a shot that convinced me to stick with the 24-70g:

It's not surprising that a 24-120 isn't quite as sharp as a 24-70, but it did surprise me that the extra focal range was almost worthless. 'Zooming in' to 120mm isn't really much of a zoom. I guess I'm too used to carrying an 80-400, where zooming in gets you something worth mentioning. I usually favor focal range over fast aperture, but not in this case.

-- hide signature --

Phoenix Arizona Craig www.cjcphoto.net "I miss the days when I was nostalgic."

Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D800E +46 more

Ask Mait • Contributing Member • Posts: 958

Beemer

Gorgeous landscape, wonderful bike and a beautiful picture.

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to bizmord • Jul 22, 2021

1

Do you have a specific application or scenario in mind? For example, here is a comparison I did a while back to examine differences in background highlights:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61792983

For any given shot, there’s always a better option than the 24-120mm. The reason to own that lens is versatility — to put more good and great shots “in the can” at the cost of fewer technically perfect ones.

-- hide signature --

Light travels at 2.13085531 × 10^14 smoots per fortnight. Catch some today!

Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Nikon D7200 +49 more

Nikonlinks • Contributing Member • Posts: 590

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to bizmord • Jul 23, 2021

I've had two copies of the 24-120/4. They are "ok". If you'd like better optics but more range than the 24-70, try the Sigma 24-105/4. My most used lens by far. Look up the review by Lens Rentals.

-- hide signature --

don www.donferrario.com

Peekas Pics • Contributing Member • Posts: 732

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

2

Nikonlinks wrote: I've had two copies of the 24-120/4. They are "ok". If you'd like better optics but more range than the 24-70, try the Sigma 24-105/4. My most used lens by far. Look up the review by Lens Rentals.

I’ve had two Nikon 24-70 f2.8 lenses and one Nikon 24-120 f4 lens. While the 24-120 is a sharp lens, the 24-70 has a very nice creamy smooth look to its images. The 24-70 creates beautiful images.

Nikon D810 Nikon D850 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G +14 more

Ansel Spear • Contributing Member • Posts: 740

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

Leonard Shepherd wrote: You have not said which 24-70 f2.8. I presume you mean an F mount version.

. . .Or, indeed, which F mount version. The VR or non-VR version.

Sony RX100 VII Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G Nikon PC-E Nikkor 24mm f/3.5D ED +16 more

nikpharm • Contributing Member • Posts: 950

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to bizmord • Jul 23, 2021

2

bizmord wrote: Just curious to hear from folks that have first hand experience comparing these 2 lenses.

If you are going to use it for portraits, then 24-70 2.8g is the better choice based on color saturation, rendition and background blur.

If you are capturing landscapes using small apertures (f8 to f11 or f16), then 24-120 f4 is the better choice as corner and edge sharpness is weak between 24-45mm on 24-70 2.8g lens.

I have not used the 24-70 2.8VR but it has got mixed reviews.

If focal length range and getting the image is more important, then the obvious choice is 24-120 f4.

-- hide signature --

Regards MK

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to nikpharm • Jul 23, 2021

1

nikpharm wrote:

bizmord wrote: Just curious to hear from folks that have first hand experience comparing these 2 lenses.

If you are going to use it for portraits, then 24-70 2.8g is the better choice based on color saturation, rendition and background blur.

A 24-70mm is only better for portraits if the focal length is right for the desired composition, and depending on distance to the background, you may see more background blur at 120mm and f/4 than at 70mm and f/2.8. When I took a Nikon portrait and lighting course, NPS supplied the attendees with 24-120mm f/4's.

If you are capturing landscapes using small apertures (f8 to f11 or f16), then 24-120 f4 is the better choice as corner and edge sharpness is weak between 24-45mm on 24-70 2.8g lens.

At these apertures, I doubt you'll see any significant difference in real-world performance.

I have not used the 24-70 2.8VR but it has got mixed reviews.

I wonder how many of those "mixed reviews" are as the result of actually using the lens, and how many are as the result of reading the results of lens tests. Here's an article which compares the two 24-70mm's along with the Tamron I own. If it wasn't for compatibility issues with my F100 and the "trade-up" price, I'd rather have the VR. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/nikon-24-70mm-f2-8-ed-af-s-vr-sharpness-optical-bench-testing/

Quoting: I’m certain there will be screaming about ‘not as sharp’ both from Nikon shooters and from other brand fanboys who will gleefully visit the Nikon boards. But this seems to have been Nikon’s design philosophy lately. The will give up some absolute center resolution to get a nice corner-to-corner image. Lenses are always a trade-off, always. And this is a great example of that.

-- hide signature --

Light travels at 2.13085531 × 10^14 smoots per fortnight. Catch some today!

Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Nikon D7200 +49 more

nikpharm • Contributing Member • Posts: 950

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

Michael Benveniste wrote:

nikpharm wrote:

bizmord wrote: Just curious to hear from folks that have first hand experience comparing these 2 lenses.

If you are going to use it for portraits, then 24-70 2.8g is the better choice based on color saturation, rendition and background blur.

A 24-70mm is only better for portraits if the focal length is right for the desired composition, and depending on distance to the background, you may see more background blur at 120mm and f/4 than at 70mm and f/2.8. When I took a Nikon portrait and lighting course, NPS supplied the attendees with 24-120mm f/4's.

Agreed but this is true when using 70-200 2.8 or 70-200 f4 at 120mm f4. When it comes to 24-120 f4, the lens is at its weakest spot at 120mm f4.

If you are capturing landscapes using small apertures (f8 to f11 or f16), then 24-120 f4 is the better choice as corner and edge sharpness is weak between 24-45mm on 24-70 2.8g lens. At these apertures, I doubt you'll see any significant difference in real-world performance.

That was the real world testing which revealed weak edge and corner performance between 24-45mm at landscape apertures for 24-70 2.8g.

I have not used the 24-70 2.8VR but it has got mixed reviews.

I wonder how many of those "mixed reviews" are as the result of actually using the lens, and how many are as the result of reading the results of lens tests. Here's an article which compares the two 24-70mm's along with the Tamron I own. If it wasn't for compatibility issues with my F100 and the "trade-up" price, I'd rather have the VR. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/nikon-24-70mm-f2-8-ed-af-s-vr-sharpness-optical-bench-testing/

Quoting: I’m certain there will be screaming about ‘not as sharp’ both from Nikon shooters and from other brand fanboys who will gleefully visit the Nikon boards. But this seems to have been Nikon’s design philosophy lately. The will give up some absolute center resolution to get a nice corner-to-corner image. Lenses are always a trade-off, always. And this is a great example of that.

As I mentioned, I have not used the VR version.

-- hide signature --

Regards MK

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

Michael Benveniste wrote: depending on distance to the background, you may see more background blur at 120mm and f/4 than at 70mm and f/2.8. When I took a Nikon portrait and lighting course, NPS supplied the attendees with 24-120mm f/4's.

Both lenses used at f4, 120mm has about 3 stops less dof than 70mm.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.

Nikon Z9 Nikon Z8 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II +22 more

OP bizmord • Contributing Member • Posts: 925

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

Ansel Spear wrote:

Leonard Shepherd wrote: You have not said which 24-70 f2.8. I presume you mean an F mount version.

. . .Or, indeed, which F mount version. The VR or non-VR version.

non VR

Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D +2 more

OP bizmord • Contributing Member • Posts: 925

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to nikpharm • Jul 23, 2021

nikpharm wrote:

bizmord wrote: Just curious to hear from folks that have first hand experience comparing these 2 lenses.

If you are going to use it for portraits, then 24-70 2.8g is the better choice based on color saturation, rendition and background blur.

If you are capturing landscapes using small apertures (f8 to f11 or f16), then 24-120 f4 is the better choice as corner and edge sharpness is weak between 24-45mm on 24-70 2.8g lens.

I have not used the 24-70 2.8VR but it has got mixed reviews.

If focal length range and getting the image is more important, then the obvious choice is 24-120 f4.

this would be mostly for travel photography or events where my 70-200 f2.8 is too much reach.

Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D +2 more

OP bizmord • Contributing Member • Posts: 925

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to nikpharm • Jul 23, 2021

nikpharm wrote:

Michael Benveniste wrote:

nikpharm wrote:

That was the real world testing which revealed weak edge and corner performance between 24-45mm at landscape apertures for 24-70 2.8g.

and 24-120 f4 is better at those ranges?

Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon 85mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D +2 more

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

Leonard Shepherd wrote:

Both lenses used at f4, 120mm has about 3 stops less dof than 70mm.

Which does not equate to background blur. Try it yourself.

-- hide signature --

Light travels at 2.13085531 × 10^14 smoots per fortnight. Catch some today!

Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Nikon D7200 +49 more

EKB • Regular Member • Posts: 400

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to bizmord • Jul 23, 2021

I didn't make a direct head-to-head test, but when I was looking for an upgrade to my 18-105mm kit lens, I rented the 24-70mm f/2.8G and was underwhelmed. A couple of years later I rented the 24-120mm f/4G, got a big "I like this lens!" smile, and ended up buying my own copy.

Now this was all on DX where I was deliberately looking for a 24-XXmm lens rather than 16-XXmm. How well other people like those lenses on FX bodies is a separate question.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 Nikon D90 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +6 more

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to bizmord • Jul 23, 2021

bizmord wrote:

nikpharm wrote:

bizmord wrote: Just curious to hear from folks that have first hand experience comparing these 2 lenses.

If you are going to use it for portraits, then 24-70 2.8g is the better choice based on color saturation, rendition and background blur.

If you are capturing landscapes using small apertures (f8 to f11 or f16), then 24-120 f4 is the better choice as corner and edge sharpness is weak between 24-45mm on 24-70 2.8g lens.

I have not used the 24-70 2.8VR but it has got mixed reviews.

If focal length range and getting the image is more important, then the obvious choice is 24-120 f4.

this would be mostly for travel photography or events where my 70-200 f2.8 is too much reach.

For that type of usage, I'd go for the AF-S 24-120mm f/4G VR over the AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G every time.

Nikon Z fc Nikon Z9 Nikon Df Nikon Z8 Nikon Z 35mm F1.8 +26 more

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

Michael Benveniste wrote:

Leonard Shepherd wrote: Both lenses used at f4, 120mm has about 3 stops less dof than 70mm.

Which does not equate to background blur. Try it yourself.

Perhaps you mean bokeh - as distinct from the generally greater degree of background blur shooting with a combination that produces less dof than another combination.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.

Nikon Z9 Nikon Z8 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II +22 more

nikpharm • Contributing Member • Posts: 950

Re: Have you ever directly tested 24-70mm 2.8 VS 24-120mm f4?

In reply to bizmord • Jul 23, 2021

bizmord wrote:

nikpharm wrote:

Michael Benveniste wrote:

nikpharm wrote:

That was the real world testing which revealed weak edge and corner performance between 24-45mm at landscape apertures for 24-70 2.8g.

and 24-120 f4 is better at those ranges?

At landscape apertures (f8 to f11/f16), 24-120 f4 is better when it comes to edge and corner performance between 24-45mm.

-- hide signature --

Regards MK

Keyboard shortcuts:

FForum MMy threads

Latest sample galleries

Latest in-depth reviews

The Nikon Zf is a 24MP full-frame mirrorless camera with classic looks that adds the latest Expeed 7 processor and features such as 3D Tracking AF to the $2000 price bracket. We're not sure the experience lives up to the looks.

The Sony a9 III is the world's first full-frame mirrorless camera to feature a global electronic shutter with simultaneous readout. We've been using a full production version of this 120 fps sports camera, to see what you gain (and, perhaps, lose).

The Aura Carver 10.1" HD Digital Frame is a great way to put your portfolio on display and a great way to surface forgotten memories. The colors are vibrant, and the build quality is solid, but the Carver isn't without a few quirks.

With a bigger battery and better video capabilities, the Fujifilm X-S20 could be the vlogging machine content creators have been waiting for.

The Sony a7CR is a high-resolution addition to the company's compact full-frame a7C series. So what did we make of it and where does it leave the a7 IV that it sits just above?

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.

'What's the best mirrorless camera?' We're glad you asked.

What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.

Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.