According provided by lens Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical huge thanks to the store www.fotika.com.uawhere you can find a huge number of different used photographic equipment, including this model.
Review of Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical
The name of the lens is rather long, but informative, in the review I will call it in abbreviated form - Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR. This lens can be considered a logical development of an older model. Nikon 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6D AF Nikkor... Also, the lens has a very interesting 'older' brother - Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 4G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical Nano Crystal Coat, which is considered almost an icon among Nikon's zooms.
Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical
Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR has a fivefold zoom. The zoom ratio is easy to calculate by dividing 120mm by 24mm focal length. This is a pretty good indicator for full-length lenses. When using such a lens on cropped cameras EGF will be 36-180 mm, while using a wide viewing angle will not be comfortable. True, on Nikon DX cameras you can try on the loss of a wide angle and, with grief in half, use 24mm. For cropped cameras, there are many universal lenses of the 18-xxx class.
Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR with hood in transport mode
One of the strengths of the lens is very fast focus. The focusing time from infinity to MDF and back is the same as Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 4G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical Nano Crystal Coat (when set to 24 mm focal length). I would like to point out that the focusing speed is much faster at 24mm than at 120mm focal length. Focusing is performed using a Silent Wave Motor (SWM). Since a focusing motor is built into the lens, the Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR will work on All Nikon Digital SLR Cameras. The lens has a classic indicator of the focusing distance, though without the DOF scale. MDF is 0.5 meters, while you can shoot macro with a maximum magnification of 1: 4.8.
The lens has internal focusing (IF), while focusing, the front and rear lenses remain stationary. When the focal length is changed, the trunk of the lens lengthens, the front lens does not rotate, and the rear lens moves in the middle of the lens, creating a noticeable vacuum cleaner effect.
![Tamron AF 28-300mm 1: 3.5-6.3 [IF] Macro A20 Aspherical LD XR DI VC and Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical](https://radojuva.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/review-nikon-ed-af-s-nikkor-24-120mm-3-5-5-6g-swm-vr-if-aspherical-1.jpg)
dimensions Tamron AF 28-300mm 1: 3.5-6.3 [IF] Macro A20 Aspherical LD XR DI VC and Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical
When focusing manually or when trying to adjust the focus in mode M / A, focus ring jerks... You can forget about smooth focusing - to manually move the focusing ring, you have to make a lot of effort, after which the ring begins to move and flies over the desired value.
Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical with hood
The lens is deprived aperturebut the Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR has a Nikon VR image stabilizer that really helps with the job. I could easily take pictures with hand at shutter speeds up to 1/20 s and 120 mm focal length without blur. The stabilization system is activated by a separate switch on the lens 'VR ON / OFF' and can compensate up to 3 stops excerpts.
Example photo on a Nikon 24-120mm VR AF-S NIKKOR f / 3.5-5.6
The aperture consists of 7 blades and closes down to F / 22 @ 24mm F / 36 @ 120mm. The lens uses fairly large 72mm filters. The Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR is assembled quite well, the lens trunk does not spontaneously protrude. The zoom ring is rubberized and located at the front of the lens, which is very convenient. The lens was produced in Japan from 2003 to 2008, and in Thailand from 2008 to 2010. The Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR is now discontinued and is among the archived Nikon lens models.
Tags on Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical
When shooting at a focal length of 24mm (widest angle), the lens produces a soft picture. In fact, at wide angle, sharpness does not improve even when the aperture is closed down to f / 16. When shooting at infinity, for example, a tree - all the leaves turn into a "mess". In this case, the sharpness falls from the center to the edges of the image. This ailment is treated by increasing the focal length to 28-35 mm, where the lens becomes sharper. Uncle Ken Rockwell turned on Nikon 24-120 / 3.5-5.6 VR due to this serious ailment to your list The 6 Worst Nikon Lenses. In general, this model is not considered very successful among photographers, and two low-dispersion and two aspherical elements in its optical design... In the review I have visited two such lenses - one mercilessly filled up the entire right corner of the image, the second was very bad in the corners at 24 mm focal length. It is said to be due to poor rear lens design, which can get slightly skewed when using the lens.
Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical and Nikon AF Nikkor 28-105mm 1: 3.5-4.5D
Aside from the low sharpness of 24mm, the lens delivers the expected quality. At 24mm, barrel distortion is slightly visible, the lens 'pulls' the edges of the frame a lot, you need to be very careful when shooting people in this range. Chromatic aberrations not very strong, only 24 mm can seriously spoil the image. Color reproduction is normal. The bokeh at the long end of the lens is normal, similar to the bokeh of many other "dark" super zooms. The vignette is only perceptible in the wide-angle range. I was pleasantly pleased with the performance in the backlight.
Here link to the archive with the originals - 665 MB, 47 photos in .NEF format (RAW) from the camera Nikon D700 (FX)
Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical on ZK
Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link, or in the price block below:
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
List of all Nikon FX 24-XXX autofocus lenses:
- Nikon 24-50 mm 1: 3.3-4.5 AF Nikkor
- Nikon 24-50 mm 1: 3.3-4.5D AF Nikkor
- Nikon 24-70 mm 1: 2.8GN AF-S Nikkor ED Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Aspherical
- Nikon 24-70 mm 1: 2.8EN AF-S Nikkor ED Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Aspherica VR + its modification of the 'Nikon 100th Anniversary Edition'
- Nikon 24-85 mm 1: 2.8-4D AF Nikkor IF Aspherical Macro (1: 2)
- Nikon 24-85 mm 1: 3.5-4.5G AF-S Nikkor ED SWM IF Aspherical
- Nikon 24-85 mm 1: 3.5-4.5G AF-S Nikkor ED VR SWM IF Aspherical
- Nikon 24-120 mm 1: 3.5-5.6D AF Nikkor
- Nikon 24-120 mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED AF-S Nikkor SWM VR IF Aspherical
- Nikon 24-120 mm 1: 4G N AF-S Nikkor ED VR SWM IF Aspherical Nano Crystal Coat
Catalog of modern lenses for Nikon can see here.
Results
Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6G SWM VR IF Aspherical - versatile lens for a full frame with image stabilizer and fast autofocus with a nice range of focal lengths. A major drawback of the lens is poor 24mm sharpness. For DX cameras, versatility will not be enough due to crop factor.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
I noticed from the photographs that at fp 24mm it washes much more on the right side than on the left and center of the frame. What price category does this lens belong to - medium, high, low? Well, the review, as always, is on top! Thanks.
Average. 500-600 cu
Egor, lathers differently, because the distance to the subject is different, so it seems that marriage occurs when the lenses are actually skewed and if you photograph the plane, one side will be in focus and the other will not, but this happens quite rarely and to notice it you need to photograph the plane, and the camera should be directed strictly perpendicular to the object.
It is in this instance that the right side is actually more strongly soaped. But, about the difference in distances, too, you must always remember.
Hello Arkady. My question is: will there be a review of the NIKON AF 60 mm f / 2.8D Micro lens?
Hello. If someone provides it to me for a day or two, I will write a review.
on d90 it shoots better ... the picture on the source is clearly better ... but it lathers my right side more too.
I am faced with the choice of this lens and Nikon Zoom-Nikkor 28-200mm F / 3.5-5.6 AF D IF Lens D series does not scare the camera d 7000 I would like to know which of these lenses draws better at all angles ???? stub is optional !!!
Nikon Zoom-Nikkor 28-200mm F / 3.5-5.6 AF D IF did not use, I can not tell, but I do not recommend the lens from this review.
nikon 24-120 / 4, however, has risen in price today.
I want to take the D600, so I choose between 24-70 and 24-120 f4 Nano, the second in focus is more interesting, and it’s sharp .. Tell me how is it? more inclined to photograph portraits and landscapes.
For portraiture, it’s better to look at some kind of fixative, such as 105/2 or 85 / 1.4 (even 85 / 1.8 works wonders, better than any of those indicated in the picture and at the price), and for landscape 24 it will probably be narrow, and from those proposed on hole 8-11 do not notice the difference.
I want to take the D600, so I choose between 24-70 and 24-120 f4 Nano, the second in focus is more interesting, and it’s sharp .. Tell me how is it? more inclined to photograph portraits and landscapes.
I didn’t use 24-120 f4, I can’t tell you, 24-70 gives a noticeable distortion of 24 mm, for landscapes and serious shooting it is better to look at wide-angle fixes with little distortion.
Thanks for the 24-120 lens review. I also face the choice of 24-120 or 28-300. There seems to be a wider angle (on d800), but something is missing. Now I will look closely at 28-300.
Nikon 24-120mm f / 3.5-5.6D IF AF Zoom-Nikkor is the older brother of the lens from this review. It does not have a stabilizer, but it has a sharper picture. ©
How much MORE sharp? An order of magnitude? Or relatively? Thanks…
An order of magnitude (i.e. 10 times) is 105 / 2,8macro from the pinhole, if cho.
Something I can't say that at 24 the picture is not sharp. There is no such problem on my glass. For this money - a super lens with a super value for money.
Sorry, I did not write that I’m renting them on d600
I have a D200 with Nikon AF-S 24-120mm, there is really a problem with sharpness, the pictures are blurry, but the biggest problem is color reproduction, there is no juiciness of colors. at 3100, or 5100 pictures will come out just super, a picture from a magazine, with d200 like from a newspaper!
I think to take to 5100 what say?
I would recommend Nikon 5100-18mm 105: 1-3.5G ED Nikkor VR AF-S SWM DX IF Aspherical to D5.6
For D5100, I would recommend "straight arms" and the brain
I have a d5100, it has a good picture. But the functionality is not enough.
On my D90, on a Nikon 18-105mm f / 3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX lens, the right side of the picture is also washed out more than the left, about the same as in the photos shown here. Maybe this is some kind of "standard" disease of Nikon's lenses?
I didn't understand something - the 2012 review became the 2014 review? and! got it! it's all about the store!
The review was updated and supplemented with examples of photos on a full frame.
Arkady, hello, when will you review the width of Sigma 10-20 mm 4-5.6?
As always - when someone gives it for review.
Good afternoon, Arkady thanks for the review, it was interesting to read and compare with the Nikon 24-120 f / 4, I am its user, unfortunately I am far away and I can’t provide you with a review, so with your permission I will describe the feeling of using this lens. Switching to full frame, sitting on a 50mm fixture, I realized that there was not enough zoom-reporter, began to monitor the market, came to the conclusion that it was better for myself to take Nikon's, ancient zooms are not found in these parts, so I decided to do something more modern, there were applicants and I managed to test them right away in the store - this is 24-70G 2,8; 24-85mm 3,5 / 4,5; 24-85D 2,8-4; 24-120 f4; 28-300 was not available, and somehow, I did not consider it at all, I’ll say I didn’t bother with all sorts of tables, I took a photo in a store, in a shop window and looked at a computer monitor at home, the summary is the following: in the center, everything is the same if strong do not find fault, on the same diaphragms, but from the center to the edges the most interesting began. 24-85D immediately went to the outsiders, the corners were soapy, started working from 5,6 and higher, did not like it, although it was almost the main contender for price-quality , the rest lined up like this - 24-70mm 2,8 expensive heavy, but very high quality, but expensive))); 24-120f / 4 quality with reservations and slightly overpriced; 24-85G price - quality (the feeling that the quality is slightly below the second place) is the best option, if you don't find fault with much. My choice fell on 24-120f / 4 - I want to note convenient focal points for travel and reporting, high-quality picture , good in backlight, although I try to avoid, the presence of a scale, 77 diameter, the presence of all kinds of super-duper-nano coatings, enlightenments and glass, stabilizer with an active mode, protection near the bayonet in the form of a rubber ring, a central guide tube made of magnesium like therefore, nothing dangles in the unfolded state, the weight is compared to 24-70G, now about the nuances, well, first of all, the assembly, the backlash of the focusing ring puzzles me and these are Japanese engineers! They decided to make a mistake for that price, from 24-28 the lens can lengthen when it is worn, it seems to lock further, when the zoom is rotated there is a slight resistance in the region of 28-40 mm, maybe this does not allow the whole lens to decompose, the distortion is 24 mm, it got a little crazy after fixation, like he pulls the angles I understand that it is not correct to compare, but still expected less, at least for 24-70G, now I’m used to it, you need to remember this, longitudinal chrome. aberrations are not pronounced, but they are present, you need to remember when editing, vignetting is the next not pleasant fact, and it manifests itself at all focal lengths, more - less from f / 8 to f / 16 practically disappears, drives air in the middle, complete set: instructions, covers , a lens hood and a sock cover from Nikon))) As a result, what we have is that the lens is between satisfactory and good, at first the feeling of irritation did not leave, about all these small jambs specially made in order not to disrupt the sales of 24-70G, over time, remembering and learning to bypass these nuances, the output is worthy of 24-70G photos for less money and weight, BUT (but again) it is still the standard among Nikon ZOOM lenses. PS Perhaps after reading the post you have a negative impression about this lens, but it’s not at all, the glass is decent, the marketing department of Nikon has finished, but still there are more high-quality photos and positive aspects from using this lens !!!
Arkady, thanks for the review!
The review can be captioned in “And the Nikon family is not without such a lens”
Somehow they used to offer such a used lens for little money, but it was the modest price that confused me. As it turned out not in vain.
Correct the typo “lengthens” to “lengthens” (paragraph before the photo with Tamron 28-300)
Fixed
I bought this lens today by accident. Filming on the Nikon D800. What can I say, quiet horror) Maybe for my money (10,000 rubles) it’s not so bad, but the lens itself is nothing! Sharpness zero, dark, manual focus is generally something! In short, upset ..
I recently acquired this lens, I didn’t notice poor sharpness at 24mm, of course not top-end professional glass for 100tr, but the sharpness is quite normal, there is soap in the corners, but for many lenses, the wider the angle, the more difficult it is to maintain sharpness at the corners and edges frame. I use this lens with Nikon D800 (maybe I just got a good copy) Since I correct my photos through Camera RAW and Phoyoshop, I’ll give an example of an already processed photo of a photo with a focal length of 24mm
Even in resize, sharpness is not so hot. I'm afraid to introduce her to 36 megapixels.
I tried on 16MP (d7000). Level 18-55 is not reached))) Even closing to f8 does not provide decent sharpness.
I give one more example on 24mm
You don’t see, even at 36 megapixels, taking into account the wildest resize, the soap in the corners is noticeable (and this is on the pressed diaphragm)
Hello Arkady! I want a zoom lens for the D600, but there’s no money for 24-70. On Avito lies this one for 8500r (Japan) and f4 for 27, what should I take? To save? Or run to borrow from the neighbors?
Arkady, thank you very much for the excellent review, now I saw the picture quality from this lens from all possible angles. I would not buy it for more than a hundred bucks with such a soap on a wide angle. And infa about a possible distortion of the rear lens is completely alarming. Better for the full frame I will continue to use my old Nikkor AF 28-105
Arkady, tell me about this lens. At me it behaves strangely on the carcass of the D700. The strangeness is as follows: on focal lengths above 60-70 mm at shutter speeds of approximately equal to 1 / FR, the stabilizer begins to shamelessly soap the picture.
A typical example is a shutter speed of 1/80… 1/125 at a focal length of 120 mm.
It's not about the blur from hand movement - with the stabilizer turned off, the picture turns out to be normal even at 1/80 s.
But it is worth turning on the stabilizer - a frank shake. And the closer the aperture, the stronger the effect.
At the moment of half-pressing the shutter button, a click is heard in the lens and a quiet sound of the stub is not heard. I tried to push the shutter button, wait 2-3 seconds for the lenses to take their position. Does not help. Still grease. And, again, the hands do not tremble (without a stub, everything is sharp and clear).
Tellingly, at long exposures (1/4 s at 24 mm and 1/15 s at 120 mm) the stabilizer works great. And at shorter exposures (from 1/160 and shorter) - everything is fine too.
What could it be? Where to dig? The firmware of the D700 is the latest (1.03 / 1.04). Maybe it's the wear of the stabilizer?
Well, he should not smear on sufficiently short shutter speeds while he works well on long ones. The feeling that the stub begins to work when you press the shutter button.
What to do?
Perhaps the problem of the stub is a trip to the service center.
Yes, I think I can attribute it to the service center for diagnostics.
Have you ever had something like this (perhaps with other lenses / cameras)? It is interesting just to understand who is to blame before going to the SC - either the camera does not correctly control the stub, or it is the stub itself that has worn out (after all, the lens is 8-9 years old).
Most likely a stub, it happened with friends.
My first lens on the D40x. I clicked on it for about 10 years until I took 35 1.8
I don't even know ... There is an opportunity to take advantage of the D800, but without optics. This lens looks like an option at the price point for the first time, but is discouraged by the "softness". Is it worth “paying two rubles and buying a chicken?” In the sense of 24-120 / 4?
Or do not suffer at all and stay on the Pentax K-3 under which optics are? But the full frame looks attractive, very attractive.
Borrow for a day - take pictures and make a conclusion for yourself “you need it” or not.
D800 / D800E is not just as cheaply given as the D600. There is a reason for everything.
I would not even look at the D800 in the absence of decent optics.
And I would proceed when buying a camera from the tasks that will face the future camera.
You can't buy dubious things just because they are “cheap”.