Give your impressions, questions, etc. of Nikon's (expected) new 24-120 f4 lens
* Nikkor AF-S 24-120 f/4 G ED VR with Nano coating (€1220/$1300)
This lens sounds so very tempting to me.
New 24-120mm f4 Lens Discussion
(74 posts) (26 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
I 2nd that Niko, it's a great focal length for a walk around lens, I have dx at the moment but will eventually upgrade to fx; it is great for either I think.
Rich.
Posted 2 years ago # -
This sounds like a great upgrade and is tempting me as well. $1,300 - Yeea-ouch! $1,300 is really up there for a non-pro and for a medium range lens. I'm looking at this or the current 85 F/1.4.
I have a love-hate relationship with the current 24-120 VR - It's not the greatest lens I own but it is not a dog either. Not sharp lens till f/8 which limits the DOF and VR usage for available light which causes me to reach for another lens a lot of the time. Good range and size and since I shoot DX still so it is not very wide but works well for portraiture. Did I mention the sharpness is not that great.
I like the lens recent updates but it seems that the choices are kit type lenses (f/5.6 min), plastic mounts, DX only or pro line lenses with 1k+ price tags and nothing in the middle. I understand all the aspects that create this situation, but I would really like to see lenses like this in the $600-800 range or less. For a non-pro but avid photographer, the continual $1k+ lenses are very disappointing to say the least.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I find this lens intriguing, especially for traveling, but I'm unsure if I would use it professionally.
But that's also because I have the 24-70/70-200 combo. Would this lens ever be sharper and faster than that combo? No. but more convenient, hell yeah.
Now with that said, I'm MORE likely to get the 16-35/4 at $1100 currently than this until the reviews set in. . .the last one was a HUGE dud, so I expect this one to sizzle, but like the above poster mentioned, it's too $$$ for a casual lens.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'd get this lens over the 16-35 any day. Most of my shooting tends to be within 24-120mm so this lens would be like a "kit" lens for me. A great compromise between max aperture and versatile focal range. However for the price, I'm expecting nothing but outstanding optical quality through out it's entire range.
TaoTeJared said:
This sounds like a great upgrade and is tempting me as well. $1,300 - Yeea-ouch! $1,300 is really up there for a non-pro and for a medium range lens. I'm looking at this or the current 85 F/1.4.I understand all the aspects that create this situation, but I would really like to see lenses like this in the $600-800 range or less. For a non-pro but avid photographer, the continual $1k+ lenses are very disappointing to say the least.
Seems to me that Nikon is making room for a new set of lenses at that price range for a new EVIL mount perhaps? I hate to think so but it has been a long while since we've seen lenses in the $500-$1000 dollar range :^(
Posted 2 years ago # -
I dunno, even though I'm a DX shooter, I'm still interested in this lens for some odd reason.
Posted 2 years ago # -
NSXType-R, maybe because it would be a great lens to pair up with the 12-24mm F4G? I use the current 24-120mm VR in that capacity, for the few occasions that I shoot in that focal range, and it does well enough. The new lens sounds great, but I'm not sure I'd sink $1300+ into a lens I wouldn't use very often.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think this lens is going to be excellent. Why? I think nikon is not going to make the same mistake twice for this same range. esp for that asking price.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Yup I agree hearty. Imagine this lens paired up as a kit with an "affordable" full frame D500 or D600!
You know since DX lenses will die soon ;^)Posted 2 years ago # -
PB PM said:
NSXType-R, maybe because it would be a great lens to pair up with the 12-24mm F4G? I use the current 24-120mm VR in that capacity, for the few occasions that I shoot in that focal range, and it does well enough. The new lens sounds great, but I'm not sure I'd sink $1300+ into a lens I wouldn't use very often.I never thought about it that way, but that's very logical. :D
But honestly, it might just be NAS and I want a cheaper high end FX lens than the 24-70 or 70-200. In essence, I want to be FX ready. :D
Posted 2 years ago # -
too pricey for me, would prefer to see a price around $800 to think of it as a good walk around lens, not to mention the fact that it shouldn't be much harder to make it over the previous one (sure it's a fixed f, but still, it's not that wide and long)
Posted 2 years ago # -
NikoDoby said:
Yup I agree hearty. Imagine this lens paired up as a kit with an "affordable" full frame D500 or D600!
You know since DX lenses will die soon ;^)LOL!
But i did say that a D90 style FX is very likely as is a D3 style DX. Wonder which will come first.. more likely a consumer FX still I did also predict that the DX line will catch up to the FX in terms of sensor performance. and if we get a D95 (as specified) it should perform as well as the D700. and for a while at least the DX and FX lines will have equivalent sensor performance. but even the D3100 overall feature set is arguably better than the D700.(at least for some people) I sure am looking forward to the D95. Time to upgrade my D70 I think :-) and then upgrade my S5pro to the D700 when the next one is announced. yeah I am a 2 camera shooter and having one of FX and one of DX should give me many options...
Posted 2 years ago # -
The price is worth it to me with the constant aperture as long as it's sharp at f/4 in the whole zoom range. I can't wait to see how it performs; it will likely be my next purchase (around Christmas).
Perfect DX->FX switch lens for me, IMO. It's usable on DX and ideal for me on FX.Posted 2 years ago # -
"Perfect DX->FX switch lens for me, IMO. It's usable on DX and ideal for me on FX."
Yeah. I agree.. Its a wonderful range for an everyday use FX lens and not bad for DX use as well. but probably not what I am needing to complement the lenses I already have unless I do some consolidation and get rid of my 35-70 F2.8 but I cant stand to part with that lovely lens... sigh... (Someone please make a good 28-105 F2.8! DX)
Posted 2 years ago # -
NSX Type-R why waste $1300 on this lens when you have the option of getting the awsome 18-200mm VR? This lens should be considered for FX shooters only who have been waiting far too long for an extreme VR zoom. I would have gotten this new lens as soon as it came out but its too late for me as I already bought the 24-70mm lens which killed me financially. Nikon is too slow releasing products, but what can you do. I'm sure this 24-120mm will be wonderful though.
Posted 2 years ago # -
There are some samples now on the Nikon website of this lens.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'm on the same high end "Kit lens" thought. For DX, pair it with a 12-24 f/4 and then that gets the equiv of 18-180 f/4. Add my 35 and 85 1.8s and that is my street bag.
I would prefer to see a 16ish-120 f/4 DX though.
I'm a bit leery of a sinking money into an Evil mount system. If I thought DX was going to go... After seeing Sony's, I am continuously wondering why Nikon can't just use their existing mount. It is about the same size. I just can't see why one couldn't put a sensor into a Old FG20 frame. Pair that with a 300 2.8. (off topic though)
If this lens is sharp as can be at f/4 this decision is going to haunt me for some time. If it does fairly well with macro-type shooting, that may push me over the edge. Just as the current one, it will be a weird place in my lenses for sure but I would get rid of a couple.
My lenses and dilemmas: (DX: 12-24, 35 1.8 //FX: 24-120vr, tokina 28-70 2.8, 70-200VR, 70-300VR, Primes: Sigma 15mm fisheye, Tokina 17mm, 24, 50, 60, 85 1.8, 105VR, 180 and 1.7 tele.)
Posted 2 years ago # -
A simple question about pricing. In the UK we pay value added tax at 17.5% and this is due to rise to 20% in January. I have been comparing the new 24-120 lens prices and to make it fair I converted the recommended prices of them against the Yen, here's my findings:
The most expensive is in the UK 1,049.99 GBP = 139858.919 Yen
Then comes the Euro which is 1099 this is equal to 119787.23 Yen
The cheapest is the US Dollar at 1,299 = 111406.518 Yen.Comparing the UK price to the Dollar is a staggering 1,630.775 USD.
I will add that the UK price is always inclusive of the value added tax.
So do those in the USA pay additional taxes on top of the purchase price or is it included?
It would also be interesting how the price varies in say Canada or Australia.
Rich (by name only :-( ).
Posted 2 years ago # -
Nikon Canada lists MSRP as $1349.95, which is before GST (Federal) and any PST (Provincial) or HST (Harmonized Federal and Provincial) taxes. Those taxes range from 5% all the way up to 14% in some places in the country. At this time no dealers are listing the lens for sale, but many sell at MSRP for the first month or so and then drop the price by $50-100.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Interesting, so in a worst case scenario say 14% tax and the RRP it equates to 125,848.359 Yen. It falls into 2nd place for highest costs. So how does the Nikon Warranty differ in each country for lenses? I am also wondering how the RRP is set if you compare your native currency against the Yen. I am probably missing something here, any thoughts anyone?
Posted 2 years ago # -
RichJB said:
So do those in the USA pay additional taxes on top of the purchase price or is it included?It varies by state, Rich, and even by county in some cases. The state I'm in now has a 6% tax on sales and where I was before it was closer to 7%. Most people don't even pay that, though, as they'll buy from online retailers that don't have a physical nexus in their state to avoid sales tax (actually called use tax in this case). I think the states won't let this go on for much longer. I saw a news story where one of the eastern states (N or S Carolina?) was asking amazon.com for a list of people who have purchased goods tax free, but I think amazon won the legal dispute.
Posted 2 years ago # -
kanuck said:
NSX Type-R why waste $1300 on this lens when you have the option of getting the awsome 18-200mm VR? This lens should be considered for FX shooters only who have been waiting far too long for an extreme VR zoom. I would have gotten this new lens as soon as it came out but its too late for me as I already bought the 24-70mm lens which killed me financially. Nikon is too slow releasing products, but what can you do. I'm sure this 24-120mm will be wonderful though.I guess I was assuming it was a metal lens and pro optics. Now that I look at it, it's not a metal lens either. I guess I also wanted it for future proofing as well- FX capable. I don't want another all in one zoom like the 18-200, if I wanted a superzoom I'd get the 70-300 VR.
But honestly, the lens I want next is the 105mm 2.8, if I were to purchase another lens, I'd want a lens with capabilities I currently don't have.
Posted 2 years ago # -
RichJB said:
Interesting, so in a worst case scenario say 14% tax and the RRP it equates to 125,848.359 Yen. It falls into 2nd place for highest costs. So how does the Nikon Warranty differ in each country for lenses? I am also wondering how the RRP is set if you compare your native currency against the Yen. I am probably missing something here, any thoughts anyone?Nikon Canada has a 5 year warranty on lenses, 2 years on bodies. No need to file warranty papers either, it is automatic.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Thanks guys for answering my query, I looked up importing a lens from other European countries, but I would get stung for import duty and VAT, so a no go. Warranty is 1 year but with an option for 2; I better start saving my pennies.
Rich.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Anyone seen any more sample images?
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
