1. The extra wide angle
2. The range
3. The mechanical and optical quality

None

I use the lens for "quick" photography during business travelling, family affairs, etc. I get great and very sharp and contrasty shots at F8 or F11 with almost no difference with prime lense results. (many not larger than 10x15" prints, with Fuji NPH400 film) It's my most popular lens.

Similar Products Used:

None

Versatile, I found the range 24-120 very useful for wedding photography. 28 is not wide enough.

I found that the sharpness and thge colour contrast of the lens are ok. (not as bad as many people blamed)

72 mm filter is expensive and not easy to find.

Slow at focal length longer than 80mm.

Before I purchase this lens (3 years ago), I was fascinated by the versatility of the range. I was attracted by the written report of many megazines

After I got the lens, I was complaining about the speed of the lens after 80mm. (aperature got down to 5-5.6)

Later on, during one of indoor wedding event, I borrowed a 35-70 2.8D on one of my F-90X body and I used my 24-120 on my second F90X body. I found that the pictures are equally sharp and I don't needed to change the lens at all. Whereas, if I use 35-70, I needed to change to 20-35 or 80-200 in some occations. During the time of lens changing, you might lost some precious momment already.
Now, I will use the 24-120 for every wedding events.

For travelling and for wedding purposes, I highly recommended this lens. In order to reduce the weight for travelling, I usually bring my 24-120, my 50 1.4 and the 2x converter. In this case, you can have a fast lens and you can cover pretty much most of the range you needed for travelling.

Customer Service

not needed

Similar Products Used:

Nikon AF 35-70 2.8D (tried)
Nikon Af 20-35 2.8D (owned
Nikon af 80-200 2.8D (owned)

Solid construction, great focal range, and sharp images.
This lense is better than the Nikon 28-105 AF. I have used both.

I would have preferred that it was fitted for 62mm filters but not really a big deal. Also, images are slightly less sharp at 120. Also at 120 has slow (5.6) F stop.

While it may not produce better images than prime lenses, it is a lot cheaper than buying three prime lenses. It is also very convenient. The bottom line is that this is a great general purpose lens. I am very pleased with my purchase.

Customer Service

I have never needed service for any Nikon product in 16 years.

Similar Products Used:

28-105 Nikon, 28-105 Viviar Series 1

It is small and compact contrary to what others think. Try 6x7 lenses and you will see.

Tremendous amount of distortion at the edges of the lens. Elongation is also a huge problem. Not a very sharp lens and too slow. If you want a decent lens, buy the 35-70 2.8 or if you want a much better system, get a Leica.

This lens is just horrible and for anyone recommending this lens to anyone else should be taken with a grain of salt.

Customer Service

not appicable.

Similar Products Used:

Pentax 67II, Pentax 645N, Nikon N90s

Nice range

Heavy
Uncommon, unique filter size
Not sharp

There's two types of people submitting reviews here: Those who understand that this is NOT a very sharp lens, and those who do not understand sharpness. For convenience in one single package and having that nice 24 mm wide end this is a good lens. For travel, for carrying one lens, etc. But sharp? Sorry, it's not. Try blowing up any photo taken with this lens over 8 x 10, then look at the corners, they will be soft. And it will be even worse if you took the shot at the long end wide open. For basic travel snaps or uncritical work this lens is good, but then versus the price and other shortfalls (like weight and expensive filters) and it starts getting questionable. I MUCH prefer the 28-105 which is MUCH MUCH sharper, faster, lighter and takes 62 mm filters which can also be used on my 75-300 and my 85 mm lenses. And last but not least is MUCH less expensive! I recommend the 28-105 and the 24 prime. For those great wide shots the 24-120 cannot hold a candle to a 24 prime. Trying to squeeze too much into one lens and you sacrifice. For me it's too much. I say: 28-105 and a 24. Your photos will show quite a difference.

Similar Products Used:

28-105
24 prime
85 prime
105 macro
75-300

Compact and versatile.
Reasonably sharp.
Nikon will come up with a 24-85 AF-D 2.8-4, which might be an alternative choices.

The cover range is excellent.

The speed is fairly slow especially if you worked indoor. The new 24-85 might be a better choice

I just checked the Nikon Japan Home page that Nikon JUST come out a new Zoom lens 24-85 AF-D 2.8-4 (go to nikon home page, choose japan and then go to products and go to autofocus lens. Don't worry. they have english version)

If you haven't brought this lens, you might want to wait for that new lens to come out and see which one you will suit your needs better.

If you already owned this lens, don't worry since this is also a great lens.

I do also agreed that this is not the sharpness lens as would compared to the nikon 2.8 zoom lens, the nikon prime lens or the Leica Zeiss lens. But who cares???

Every one knows that prime lens and Zeiss lens are way better than the zoom lens.
However, the problem is how many of use can afford the full gear of leica lens? from 24 to 120? Each of the leica zeiss lens costs at least $1000US. The same focal range (ie 24-120) of leica lenses will cost you a fortune, right?
How much weight are you going to put in your shoulder after carrying all these lenses?? How much time you needed to take to change the proper lens before shooting one frame???

For this lens, the versatility and compact are the selling point.

35-70 2.8 is definitely an excellent lens. However, it doesn't cover the same range. For light weight travelling, this is not the best choice.

Sharpness is ok for this lens. Eventually for portrait shooting, we always try to put some diffuser/soft filters in order to reduce the sharpness of the lens. (unless, if working with a supernice and beautiful model that you want 100% sharpness =)

Again, the only problem I found on this this lens is the speed is too slow at longer focal length.
When I shoot indoor with a flash and use a slow speed film, (eg iso 100 or 200), the metering will tell the camera to set the aperature to 4 and shuttle speed at 60. However, the aperature will be closed to 5-5.6 at 80mm and up. As a result, the negatives might be a bit underexpose. In this case, I found that the 24-85 2.8-4D is a better choice. HOwever, don't worry, the latest film have quite a big range of light sensitivity. My pictures are all very good.

Indeed, I also tried the AF-S 28-70 2.8 and I just fall in love with it. However, this cost way too much compared to my 24-120.

Customer Service

Not yet needed

Similar Products Used:

28-70AF-S 2.8 (tried)
35-70AF-D 2.8 (borrowed)

small, much smaller than you imagined
high quality
fast focussing
wide zoom ('love them)

need to be careful at 120 end
might not be shallow enough
pincushion at wide end enhancing wide look

This is a funny lens. I have been using slr zooms for a long time. Most of them were adequate for occasional use and delivered decent picture quality. Most of them delivered lower contrast than prime lenses, but that is not necessarily bad for a portrait lens. One can argue forever about lens quality and the potential one lens has over another. That is why most lens tests have no bearing whatsoever unless the lens is limited physically. I have been using this lens for 6 months after buying it (I would have gotten it sooner if I hadn't read/relied on all those reviews). After looking over the many prints/enlargements that I have taken with several different cameras and lenses, this lens with my Nikon body shoots the most consistently 'nice' photographs. Contrast is high, higher than some german glass that some people hold to high esteem and sharpness is above average. I don't know how Nikon has done this, have both techinical quality and wide zoom range, but this lens is a worthy tool to have on a camera body. It is not an excellent value, but the best wide zoom out there.

Similar Products Used:

None

great versatility

too slow at f/5.6 on the long end (120mm).
focusing ring when used manual seems too flimsy.

I dropped my F-100 w/ the 24-120mm attached (to my horror) when I was in London this June. Only the skylight filter shattered. The lense was untouched. Due to the massive size of the filter size (72) , I had a hard time locating a camera dealer who carried a skylight in London or Paris. I threw my B+W polarizer on it for protection and waited until I came home to buy one.
I find the lense to be a great buy for travel photography. If you want a great portrait lense, go for a single focal length. I have the Nikkor 105mm Nikkor Micro. What a beauty!

Customer Service

haven't had to use it

Similar Products Used:

35-135mm Nikkor MF

best wide zoom, *maybe

slowish

Hey, Nikon has a new 24-85 which has macro 1:2 and a 9 bladed diaphram for better bokeh! Also it is a 2.8-4.0; super speed for a zoom (although like Tamron style). I suspect that it is not great wide open, but overall gives the lens much greater speed. It is an aspheric lens design, but with bonded aspheric elements, maybe using plastic.
I envy the the specs on that new lens, but the extra length (24-120) is welcome in the same size package.

My 24-120 is the perfect street, travel lens which delivers good to almost excellent results. The contrast is really excellent and sharpness is above average. Now that the new lens is out, f3.5-5.6 looks really terrible, but in actual use, it's okay. The color balance is the best out of any zoom I have ever used, having rich colors. The 24-120 was designed as a one lens solution- a 24 +28-105 would totally defeat that purpose. That would be ridiculous, wasting time and money. If you want only a 24, get a 24 prime. The 24-120 build quality is very good. It is solid and compact and with body fits into a medium fanny sack. The 24-120 is one of the best (if not the best) wide zooms out there. (Canon's 24-85 reportedly good, too and I expect the new Nikon 24-85 to be even better) SLR photography is getting more and more convenient with new equipment becoming more consumer driven. Here's what I would like next: a new compact, superlight, simple SLR body(with manual like controls+N70-like flash), which has no left grip (due to less weight and left grip would be the lens barrel) designed mostly for mobile operations like street photography, travelling, and photojournalism, when you need to be stealth and be able to sling your equipment close to your body without it impending your movement. I know, sort of like the Olympus IS design, but only better with interchangable lens design and Matrix metering. Oh and by the way, can someone please develop technology to get rid of the mirror slap?

Similar Products Used:

None

NIL

Lots of it

The worst Nikon lens I ever come across. All those who says that this lens is great are bribed by Nikon. Take a picture of with lens during your holiday and you would be back home crying. Landscapes suffered from extreme vignetting. The centre is white, while the corners are dark blue. This I called it the "Special effect" from Nikon. Nikon's lens coating is horrible. The guy who responsible for this lens ought to be shot. It doesn't deserves to wear the brand Nikon. Cheaper lens from Sigma the 28-70 F2.8 EX puts Nikon to SHAME.

Similar Products Used:

Nikon 28-70 F3.5-4.5 Sigma 28-70 F2.8