Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 457633" data-attributes="member: 9240">I have them both available to use and I use the 24-120mm 98% of the time.&nbsp; Those who say it's &quot;no good&quot; are out of their minds and base their opinion on internet speculation and not on photos.&nbsp; It's not the 24-70mm f2.8 and it's not supposed to be - but they still use it as a measuring stick and when it doesn't match it then &quot;it sucks&quot; because the price is over $1000. That said, the 24-85mm is a really nice lens as well, and it has that distinct advantage of being smaller and lightweight.&nbsp; If I'm carrying my 70-200mm f4 as a primary then I'll toss the 24-85mm in my bag to save space and weight, like I will be tonight shooting an outdoor concert where I might want to grab some wide shots of the venue from the back.&nbsp; Is it a &quot;better&quot; choice than the 24-120mm?&nbsp; Not from an IQ perspective, particularly if I need to shoot wide open.&nbsp; But if I'm stopped down it's going to make no appreciable difference for my needs tonight.&nbsp; The one knock on the 24-120mm seems to be CA, and that cleans up automatically for me in Lightroom so I don't give it a second thought.Check this site.&nbsp; It allows you to compare lab photos of two lenses by mousing over the frame.&nbsp; It shows you Center, Mid-frame and Corner details for each.&nbsp; It's as close as you can get to optical field testing without actually having the lens.&nbsp; Honestly, I'd rather look at these than DxOMark scores.&nbsp; I've preset it for you.<a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=811&amp;Camera=614&amp;Sample=0&amp;FLI=0&amp;API=0&amp;LensComp=733&amp;Go.x=8&amp;Go.y=10&amp;CameraComp=0&amp;FLIComp=0&amp;APIComp=0" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=811&amp;Camera=614&amp;Sample=0&amp;FLI=0&amp;API=0&amp;LensComp=733&amp;Go.x=8&amp;Go.y=10&amp;CameraComp=0&amp;FLIComp=0&amp;APIComp=0" target="_blank">Nikkor 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 vs. 24-120mm f4</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 457633, member: 9240"] I have them both available to use and I use the 24-120mm 98% of the time. Those who say it's "no good" are out of their minds and base their opinion on internet speculation and not on photos. It's not the 24-70mm f2.8 and it's not supposed to be - but they still use it as a measuring stick and when it doesn't match it then "it sucks" because the price is over $1000. That said, the 24-85mm is a really nice lens as well, and it has that distinct advantage of being smaller and lightweight. If I'm carrying my 70-200mm f4 as a primary then I'll toss the 24-85mm in my bag to save space and weight, like I will be tonight shooting an outdoor concert where I might want to grab some wide shots of the venue from the back. Is it a "better" choice than the 24-120mm? Not from an IQ perspective, particularly if I need to shoot wide open. But if I'm stopped down it's going to make no appreciable difference for my needs tonight. The one knock on the 24-120mm seems to be CA, and that cleans up automatically for me in Lightroom so I don't give it a second thought. Check this site. It allows you to compare lab photos of two lenses by mousing over the frame. It shows you Center, Mid-frame and Corner details for each. It's as close as you can get to optical field testing without actually having the lens. Honestly, I'd rather look at these than DxOMark scores. I've preset it for you. [URL="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=811&Camera=614&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=733&Go.x=8&Go.y=10&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0"] Nikkor 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 vs. 24-120mm f4[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification