one lens solution
99.99% of shooting here
compact, for a 5X lens!
needs some 200,400 for handholding

pricey one lens, but probably all you need
large filters

This is a great lens. Now that I see all the copycat lenses: Tokina 24-200 or even Tamron 24-135, I know that the 24-120 range is perfect. Those other lenses are pretty good, too. I have seen test shots of the Tamron and I think that at the 135 end, it is sharper wide open. 120 and 135 are pretty close though in look and range. Wow, consumers have a tough time these days- you can almost get any kind of lens you want for a wide ranging price. The Nikon build is pretty good- manual focus ring is small and wiggly, but that is common with all Nikon zooms that I have used. Don't make the mistake that most other people do- don't buy a lens just because it expands your range just a little bit or overlaps your most used lens because you end up with a lens that sits unused in the drawer. I used to have a 24-50, which was great (and I believe to be as good or even better in some aspects), but I wanted a one lens solution (not to carry the 24-50 with a 70-180 or 80-200). I just needed a bit more like 100. That's where I think that the 24-85 falls short. 50 and 85 are not that much different. 50 to 120 is significant and even 85-120 is noticable (from 24, of course). Why did Nikon make so many 24-X lenses. I guess 24mm zooms are all the rage now. Even the filter suppliers are scrambling to make 72mm sizes as all the lens manufacturers have their 24-x lenses copying Nikon's size. When the 24-85 came out, I thought wow a 2.8 lens, but you still need to stop it down to get the good results. I believe that it is the same lens as the 24-120, but with little tweaks. I know that this review may sound like I am championing for my lens, but then I have always had a soft spot for the original innovative product. It shouldered the development of those lenses that followed it and ultimately opened up a new door for new tools for the photographer. Kudos to Nikon. Good value compared to the new recently introduced lenses. I still use my 24mm prime for its compactness and stealthiness, but the 24-120 is my main squeeze.

Similar Products Used:

most Nikon zooms

5X zoom
Sharp, consistant

Large filter size
Weight
Little slow
Vignetting with CPL/UV filters on

Great all round lens, covers most all of my travel photography, always carry 200/400 film for indoor/dull days. Great saturation and sharpness for outdoors and flash work. Found that it suffers from serious vignetting with more than one filter at a time. Too slow for many situations so still carry a 50mm prime. Hard to fault otherwise, d*** reliable, impressive results. Almost the perfect one lens solution.

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

Nikon 35-80, Nikon 70-300

Large zoom range

Large filter size
Large Min F-stop
Quite soft over 85mm

I would have to say that this lens is good from 28-85mm and the rest of the range I only use if I don't have time to cange lens. The 24mm end is not bad, But the 120 end is quite soft.

Customer Service

Had problems getting a MF-26 fixed. Had to send it back 3 times.

Similar Products Used:

35-135 Nikon

the most fun lens ever!

a bit slow, but you know that
use film and techniques accordingly

This is the original one and my favorite lens even though it is not very fast. You can still save a shot by getting in close and going to 24 for the slow speed shot in an emergency. Because at 120, you need both higher shutter speed and more light, the max f5.6 is quite dangerous for both AF and potential camera shake. You might mistake this lens to be terrible if you don't know how to deal with it. I have had some wonderful shots with this lens, knowing well how it performs. For some reason, due to the design or because of the quick focus throw, manually focussing the lens works best for the sharpest image. With the N70 or N90s, the way the focus sensors are clustered in the middle, the focus is not as precise as I like. I noticed this when I switched to using a Nikon manual body for a few rolls- the shot came out mucho sharper. If you want to squabble about the lens being not as sharp as others (like the 24-85), don't get caught in the little nuances of equipment envy- I have discovered that on the Nikon Imaging site in Japanese that the 24-120 accross the focal range has higher MTF numbers than the 24-85. I also found a French site that showed shots from both lenses at varied aperatures and focal lengths- the difference is so amazingly small (either way), that there is no way conditions could be perfect enough for you to create a situation (unless limited physically) that would show ANY difference between the lenses. I also have a 24 Nikkor prime which is noticably more contrasty than either of these lenses. With such an incredible range and decent performance throughout, this is a great lens. It is priced pretty good, too because it has been out for a while. I know that people squabble over the smallest things- me, too. I had a different lens, but this is the one I wanted- and I must admit, it is exactly what I need. I think that most of the people who crap about this lens have never used it or have unfounded expectations placed on the lens. If you plan to use the lens extensively at the long end, it is probably better to get a cheap 75-300 (100 clams). This lens has it all it a small stubby package.

Similar Products Used:

many wide ranging zoom, this one's best for me

The focal length range is great, especially if you want to travel with one lens. I've been using this lens more and more and the results with various subjects (landscape, car shows, casual portraits) has been outstanding. Some complain about it's size and weight but I for one like some heft to the camera/lens. Flyweight bodies and lenses don't inspire much confidence but to each his or her own.

It would be nice if it was a fixed aperture of f4 throughout the range but then the price would probably double.

There seems to be a very wide opinion of this lens. I don't know what those that deplore it are doing. I think some photogs are more interested in pseudo scientific testing than they are in getting outside and getting real world results. No lens is going to be outstanding for every situation that arises but this lens probably comes as close as any. I don't plan on getting rid of my 24mm prime because it's much easier to set hyperfocal focusing. I recently enlarged (8x12)some casual children's portraits and they are as sharp at about 85mm as my 85 f1.4AF. Naturally, the 85 f1.4 is going to render the background softer but the children's faces couldn't be sharper. For an outdoor event, such as a party or wedding, this lens would be perfect as long as there is plenty of light. For those that complain about it's aperture I have to wonder why you bought it in the first place. If you need speed back it up with a 50 f1.8 or 1.4. Says right on the box it's a 5.6 at 120 so don't expect the bright viewing of an f1.4. Use ISO 400 film for casual work, have a good lab process it, understand the limitations of this or any other lens, and you'll love this one.

Similar Products Used:

Got rid of a 28-200 Tamron because I needed more at the wide angle end.

-Solidly built.
-Sharp enough for such a wide range.

-Light fall off in the corners when using polarizer at 24mm.
-Very unconfortable when you want to keep a fixed flash measure. Have to be always carefull about the change in f stops when changing focal distance.
-Too bulky to my taste.Not discreet.

Great for journalism and fast action situations, very confortable for travelling.
Dont recomend it for studio portraiture or any other situation in which you wanna keep the same aperture constant.´It can become a pain to be always worry about the f changes.

Customer Service

-First time dropred it with the bag and the focusing ring got stocked. Had to pay about $80 to get it fixed. It got noisier after that.

Similar Products Used:

None

Good zoom range with relatively sharp images. I also have a Nikon 28-200 but find this lens is sharper and I make more use of the additional 4mm of wide angle than I do of the additional 80mm of telephoto.

My only complaint is the relatively slow speed of the lens (f5.6) but I recognize that a faster lens with this range would be too heavy to carry on a regular basis and too expensive for my budget. I have an 80-200 f2.8 and it is a much faster lens but because of its weight I often leave it at home.

A very nice lens that takes sharp photos. For my work it is a more useful range than the 28-200.

Similar Products Used:

Nikon 28-200
Nikon 80-200 f2.8

This lens has excellent sharpness for a zoom of this range. Furthermore, the 24-120 allows me to carry only one lens in tight situations.

Two. The particular lens I have autofocuses badly at f5.6 on my n90s; I suspect this is caused by the fact that the maximum aperature at 120mm is really about f6.3 (pop photo, dec 99 pg. 102). Furthermore, the D chip in the lens doesn't commmunicate correctly with my camera and flash; often when it's set at 24mm@f3.5, my camera reads f5.6 and my SB28 reads 85mm (maximum flash zoom) and f5.6. Once I zoom in and out, it fixes the problem, but it's definitely annoying.

I hefted this camera around India for two weeks, and found it to be extremely versitile in producing some very sharp slides. Considering the three or four lenses it saves you, it's light, easy to operate and cheap. I'd like to see a comparison with the 24-200, though.

Customer Service

About to try it.

Similar Products Used:

None

This lens allows me to create pictures that would not be always be possible with fixed focal length lenses. Greatest strengths include close focusing, a very useful range and sharpness throughout the range. Optimum sharpness at 120mm is achieved at intermediate apertures (f8.0 is best) and with use of a tripod (as with any telephoto lens).

None to report.

An ideal lens for both landscape and people pictures. I have achieved excellent results throughout the range. Use a tripod for telephoto shots (I use one for most picture-taking). I recommend supplementing this excellent lens with a fixed focal length lens for very specific situations (eg. I have a Tamron 90mm macro, which is a sharp lens - very useful for macro shots of flowers, etc.) For most situations, however, the Nikon 24-120mm fits the bill.

Customer Service

n/a

Similar Products Used:

Tamron 28-200. The range of this lens compromises quality, particularly at the long end. I owned the original model an

For a 24-120 range it is the best quality. Obviously it would be better to buy 2-3 lenses of fixed focal length, but come on wouldn't that weigh more? And obviously cost more!

Two small ones. The focusing ring is definitely designed for auto focus bodies. If you have a manual focus it's a bit sloppy to the feel. Also, I had to change to a B2 focusing screen, because the lower half of my split screen was dark. I think that problem relates to focal length, and is not inherent to this lens.

I would recommend this lens for anyone looking for versatility and quality.

Customer Service

Always excellent if you have questions. In 20 plus years of owning Nikon I've never had a problem.

Similar Products Used:

none.