< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

NPS started shipping the new Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR lens

Pin It

Update: some readers in Australia already received their 24-120 lens last week on Friday.

Today NPS started shipping the Nikkor AF-S 24-120mm f/4G ED VR lens to members who ordered through their priority purchase program:

"Dear NPS Member,

Your NPS priority purchase request has been released to your selected Nikon Authorized dealer. Please make arrangements to follow-up with your Nikon Authorized dealer. Enjoy your new purchase and thank you for your continued support. Should you have any questions, contact us."

Regular shipments should start by the end of the week in the US (this is also when B&H and Adorama will re-open for business again).

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://joelc.com.au Joel C

    Can’t wait to see example shots, might be good wedding lens..

    • AG

      Don’t know about weddings, but my elder friend is an event shooter… And he’s very happy with the old 24-120VR along with the D3s… Actually there’s no real alternative for this FL in Nikon’s lineup… so 24-120/4 is very welcomed…

      • S

        How about Nikon getting a little more serious and remaking the 24-70 with better edge sharpness, less barrel distortion and VR? I’d pay £1600 for that, the 2007 24-70 is good but could be much improved. The two copies I had were very sharp in the centre but seriously lacked in the corners.

        • Ten

          Yes, lacking VR is very strange for this

          • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

            It doesn’t lack VR?

            • aetas

              I believe ten, was talking about s’s comment. Which was about the 24-70 lacking vr. I could be wrong though.

        • JonS

          How bad are your TD’s? You need VR for the 24-70? Jeez, that lens on my D700 is about as solid as a rock….

      • Segura

        Seems like your friend is doing people a dis-service shooting with the old 24-120mm, hopefully he is shooting these events for free.

        • Karlosak

          What a snob comment. Which one would you choose for your daughter’s wedding: a gifted photographer with the “old” 24-120mm or an uninspired “pro” with the D3s and all the top glass?
          The photographer’s craft and vision is much more important that the tools he or she uses.

          • Nikondad

            BRAVO!

          • http://joelc.com.au Joel C

            +1

    • Hochzeitsfotograf

      poor bride who will get photog shooting that

      • http://joelc.com.au Joel C

        -1

  • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

    Can someone explain to me the benefit of a lens like this to a professional?

    I’m not interested in limited DoF snapshots. The 24-70 is already uninteresting enough to me, while I understand the love people do have for it… but f/4? C’mon. I know they are smaller and lighter, but why do pros care except for vacation photos? And even then, there are better options.

    And even on vacation photos, I want something with more control than this.

    • comoskanga2

      I would think for when the ability to change lenses is not possible but there is still a need for a large focal range, this would be great. Being in the pit would be an example.

      And while f/4 isn’t f/2.8, it sure better than a variable aperture in my mind.

    • Toso

      Cuz Canon make a bunch of f4′s and a bunch of wannabes keep whinging about it?

      • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

        Bhaha… that’s probably true.

    • Twoomy

      Landscape photography, hiking photography! Duh! Many of us landscape shooters do not need f/2.8 zooms for our work; we need lighter lenses that we can take with us on the go. If I always stop down to f/8-f/11, an f/2.8 is a waste of money and weight. Yes, f/4 lenses aren’t for everybody. But that’s why Nikon and Canon make so many different lenses; everybody has a different need. Now have fun stroking your 24-70 f/2.8. :)

      • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

        I hope that’s a joke, cause I think I said I don’t like the 24-70. ;-)

        • Twoomy

          Sorry, yes, just having fun. No offense intended.

        • Segura

          Why don’t you like the 24-70mm? And the 24-70mm is not just about being 1 stop faster, it is a sharper lens with better resolution. And keep in mind the lens is worst either wide open or completely stopped down, so the pics from the 24-70mm @ f/4 will be much sharper, etc, than this lens shot at f/4.

          • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

            I don’t like the 24-70 because I’m sacrificing flexibility in the parts of a lens that matter to me for convenience… which is never worth it for me.

            I shoot faster than f/2.8 most of the time for the depth of field or low light. The 70-200 is the only exception to that for me, but 200mm @ f/2.8 is vastly different from 70mm @ f/2.8… hence I RARELY use the 70-200 @ 70mm.

            I know it’s a personal thing, but I’d rather carry a prime than a mid-range zoom.

            • NPS Asia

              I am guessing that you’re missing something?? or is just that what you feel and thing that is good for you?

      • http://www.pbase.com/jameslclarke James Clarke

        I rather have the 35 f/2 plus a good Circular Polariser on my D700 when I go hiking. That’s a much better light weight kit for hiking than a F4 zoom, plus it’s two stops faster.

        Having said that I think the 24-120 makes a good travel/General Purpose zoom, so I’ll probably buy it for that. I’ll just wait until dpreview and photozone test it out before I make up my mind.

        • http://products.plantae.sk miso

          +1

        • nau

          why do you need faster lens for hiking? most of the shots will be nature and ppl shots…
          I do agree size matters but thn again d700 not the small-ish camera to start with : )

          24-120 great range for 1lens do it all – which is basiclly what most common ppl want to start with

      • Zograf

        24-120 is not much lighter than 24-70… Besides, 16-85+D7000 would make better combo anyway. That;s what I am thinking of getting instead of 24-120VR1/4. D7000+16-85 is 650g lighter than the D700+24-120 outfit. Approx the same price… I am sure will do the same job for snapshots, mind you even better. IMHO. Regards.

        • Zograf

          “Approx the same price” I meant D7000+16-85 against 24-120))

  • http://galleries.gorji.com Gorji

    Exciting news. I would like to see the lens data.

    • Champ

      And I’d like a DX version, aah but we can dream…

      • http://www.pbase.com/jctangney John Tangney

        This is essentially the FX version of the current DX 16-85. However, that said, an F4 version of the DX 16-85 would be VERY welcome!

  • Ant

    This lens seems to be aimed more at consumers rather than pros. It’ll be interesting to see if Nikon release a 70-200 f4 lens. Canon’s has done well and if Nikon can do it for around EUR 1k street it might be a good buy for the enthusiastic amateur.

    • Anonymous

      $1300, constant aperture, nano coating… What a consumer lens, are you kidding ?

  • Mike

    F/4 on FX has more OOF drop off than 2.8 on DX. So anyone coming from DX will enjoy a similar or better background blur. With today’s high ISO abilities, noise at motion stopping shutter speeds in low light isn’t a big deal. I do lots of weddings and primarily use 3 1.4 primes: 24G, 50G, & 85D, and I can think of many uses with this lens where utility & range trump wide apertures. In the “off season” I do more landscape stuff and this combined with my 16-35 would make a great travel/landscape combo.

  • momo

    I’ve got mine on Thursday afternoon (Bangkok time)

  • Segura

    Sean,
    This lens is certainly not aimed at the PRO’s, but Nikon seems to be getting their ducks in a row to release a more affordable FX (D400?). I mean what pro would shoot with the 28-300mm? Keep in mind the price of the 28-300mm is cheaper than the f/4′s and no Nano, and no Gold Ring (the f/4 lenses have the gold ring)

    Pro: 24mm, 35mm,85mm f/1.4
    Pro Zoom: 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm f/2.8
    Prosumer / Advanced: 16-35mm, 24-120mm f/4 (+70-210mm??)
    Consumer: 28-300mm f/slow

    • Anonymous

      What’s your measure of a PRO lens? It depends on the branch. Priorities… Any lens sharp to the corners @ f/8 is a pro-equipment for a landscape photographer, while a wedding photographer may swear by the new 85mm f/1.4.

      • http://www.seanmolin.com Sean Molin

        A wedding photographer may also swear by the 16-35 or 17-35… the latter being definitively a pro lens, even if marred by some flaws.

  • camaman

    Internet shops closed for Succos??
    Whats the logic behind that? :/

    • rttew

      goes to show how much money they must be making if they can afford to for go orders and inconvienience customers for days or weeks on end before filling orders. just use amazon, they want the business.

  • Johan

    It always amuses me that people complain about new lenses just because they do not want to buy them themselves. It all depends on what you are shooting and what your preferences are. Do you need fast glas? Low weight? Big zoom range? What can you afford?

    This lens looks like a very welcome addition to the FX line and the constant aperture is definitely an improvement from the DX version, 16-85. However personally I prefer an ultra wideangle and a telephoto lens for shooting landscapes and nature. Preferably mounted on two different cameras, DX to keep the weight down. But that is just my preference. If I shot FX I would probably prefer this lens and a couple of primes to the praised 24-70.

  • RMT

    More importantly: Has anyone been able to test the (production version of the) lens yet?
    Any comments/reviews?

  • SebastianK

    seems like Nikon has spent a lot of resources designing even more lenses in the medium FL range, where we already have lots of good zooms and even better primes.
    I’d like to see a wide prime for DX -like a down-scaled version of the 20/2.8 (say, 14/2.8 DX).
    and on the other end, a AF-S 400/5.6 VR.

  • lolcatmaster FTW

    NR admin can you arrange a guest article of a professional shooter who can do a review of this lens? (no wall bricks or cats! better if she or he can show real life examples :D) please????

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      I will have a quick hands-on on all new Nikon lenses starting next week. I will post few “snapshots”, but nothing “professional”. The first lens will be the new 85mm 1.4. Look for the post on Monday.

      • lolcatmaster FTW

        Thank you :)!!!! You rock! Even if they are not by a pro I prefer your opinion rather than photozone´s or Dpreview (which their conclusions always go against their data and samples…)

        I´m really looking forward for this lens because it can be a quite good 1 lens solution for studio work :)

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

          I will have the 28-300 and the 24-120 next week and will do a comparison. Haven’t done this before, so we shall see.

          • Landscape Photo

            wow!

          • Jerry Hughes

            Would love to see your test shots and opinion on this new lens. When will they be up?

  • Nathan Shane

    This afternoon I was looking at the website of one of our local camera stores and noticed they finally had the new 24-12o listed as IN STOCK. So I called in they said they had just gotten a shipment in this afternoon, so I told them to hold one for me and I was on my way. They still had two on the shelf and perhaps more in back, so if you live near Dallas Texas, you can get one at Arlington Camera. Here’s the link to their Nikon lenses webpage. http://www.arlingtoncamera.com/shop/catalog/Nikon_Lenses-39-1.html

    Anyway, I took a few photos at f/4 racked out to 120mm and I’ve been impressed with the sharpness I’m seeing so far and the sharpness and contrast at other focal lengths seem to be equally as impressive. I own the 24-70mm f/2.8 and was kinda hesitant about buying the 24-120mm f/4 since it’s so new and there are no online lens tests yet. But after shooting the past couple years with the 24-70mm and 70-200mm, I had been coming to realize that a good majority of the images I take are right around a 70 – 150mm focal range and around f/4 – f/8. In fact, since I use Lightroom 3, I was able to do a search of my photos and see which lenses, focal lengths and apertures are used most often and that further confirmed that the new 24-120mm seems to be more of an ideal lens for me…I guess we’ll see over time if that bears itself out.

    • Pete

      Hi Nathan, are you using a plugin to get your lens / focal length usage statistics, or is that a new built-in feature in LR3?

      • Nathan Shane

        Hey Pete, it’s a built in feature of LR and I think it’s been in there with the previous builds. When you’re under the “Library” module of LR, across the top bar of the display window you can select: Text, Attribute, Metadata and None. I choose Metadata which allows you to then customize the information you want to see in different columns. I have five columns setup to display: Lens, ISO Speed, Focal Length, Aperture, Shutter Speed. Then you can select each folder of pictures you have and it will display all that information for every photo in that particular folder.

  • Back to top