|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on January 13, 2023 Pros: Size, weight, quality, price. Cons: Brightness, backlight. Opinion: After the heavy and bulky f 2.8 on Nikon Z I switched to 24-200 and I rediscovered the pleasure of going around without the bulk and weight of the "traditional" kit. Certainly in extreme conditions (backlight, low light, etc.) there are some limits but everything is amply rewarded by the great versatility that allows you to capture a much wider range of events. Versatility is the strong point of this lens and in addition it is also sharp and with good color rendering. The dimensions and weight are absolutely adequate and the tropicalization is very appreciable. With the Z6 or Z7 it fits very well in a small bag and I recommend a nice pancake to complete (28 and / or 40 mm) for photos in low light. |
  | sent on December 24, 2022 Pros: sharpness Cons: minimum aperture Opinion: I had the opportunity to try it improperly (portrait in ambient light) and I must say that it surprised me for sharpness (all the photos taken at 6.3, then at t.a.), and 'practically a 24/70 a little' longer from which it inherited the excellent sharpness. Despite my concerns '(I always had focal lengths or zoom 2.8) I bought it as an all-rounder to use with my z6. I recommend it to those who should make a non-specialist use, it will give you excellent satisfaction and you will not have to change lens while you are around (dirtying the sensor). Look for it used (new costs too much like all Z lenses) and you won't regret it. Brava Nikon!!! vote 8 |
 | sent on November 23, 2022 Pros: size, weight, rational price, adequate image quality Cons: brightness but it could not be otherwise Opinion: I have some Z-series lenses with which I already covered the entire focal range from 14 to 200. I took this 24-200 for the size and because in particular when I photograph in situations of 'sociality', outdoors and with beautiful days, the qualitative result is certainly good, especially considering the fact that most people will look at the images on the mobile phone or at best on the monitor. I also find it a lens suitable for mountain excursions, both for a matter of weight and size and practicality because it allows you to use the most expensive optics only when actually necessary and because it does not require frequent lens changes in environments perhaps rich in pollen that then remain adhered to the sensor ;-). Both in the 24-70 and 70-200 spectrum, obviously the difference with the other lenses can be seen but if the lighting conditions are good, the quality is still adequate. In this regard, it must be remembered that it is a structurally very complex lens and that if it were excellent at one focal length, it would certainly be very bad at another. Instead, the images it provides are on average more good than sufficient and this overall balance is one of its strengths. If it were brighter... It would no longer be him because it would be much heavier and more expensive. |
 | sent on May 05, 2022 Pros: Versatility, weight, all-rounder Cons: too little light, and therefore also the cost Opinion: It can be fine as a handyman in situations with MOOOOLTA brightness. Already zooming a little comes soon to f6 so GOODBYE indoor photographs in conditions of medium brightness, unless you have a Z9 that responds very well to very high ISO. It can replace the supplied 24-70 f4, for a trip, given its versatility, minimum footprint and very low weight, but forget about doing serious things in dim environments such as indoor situations or sunsets. The mouth is 67mm so smaller than the 24-70 f4 (which has a 72mm) and therefore with the same zoom, iso times and aperture the photo comes out a darker hair, but you can compensate in post production. In essence? 750 euros are worth them, but no more. I do not return it because of the practicality and the minimum encumbrance, I am a hobbyist and I might as well carry less ballast with you. At the moment so I will carry around this, and the unsurpassed Z 14-24 f2.8 (which is worth gold for how much it weighs) for landscaping, while for indoor events I leave it at home. |
 | sent on October 04, 2021 Pros: Extremely versatile, relatively portable, perfect for amateurs Cons: not very bright but not a big deal Opinion: Let's immediately mark the fact that it is not one of the lenses of the PRO Nikon Z line. Having said that, to cover the focal range of this lens with the PRO, it takes 2, the 24-70 and the 70-200 that - if both pro - come to cost over 5K. For users like me who use the forographic machine for leisure and hobby, I would say that it is ideal and all in all also preferable to the 24 -70 f4. Despite the fateful f 4-6.3, I can reassure everyone that bokeh can be done and the risk of not being able to take a picture for low light is really minimal, especially if the camera body is a Z6/Z7 versions I or II, these machines in fact have a very good ISO seal. Just to give an example I set maximum ISO to 400 and it is really rare to have to raise them. In short, unless you have professional needs, I would recommend it without any doubt. |
 | sent on June 09, 2021 Pros: portableity, wide range of focal points Cons: brightness, plastic construction Opinion: Good goal, great all-rounder but, on Z7 with the ring adapt the 24/120 and also the 28/300 they still have something to say. Those who have one of the last two goals will consider whether it is worth buying. Certainly transportability; machine-lens make it a must. From this point of view, reducing the size of the equipment with the advent of the Z series brings us back to a past in which there were, for example the Pentax MX. |
 | sent on May 19, 2021 Pros: Excursion, weight and size, stabilization and sharpness by type of optics Cons: Lack of af/mf button on optics Opinion: I used the nikon 24-120 f4 for years in combination with SLRs and purchased this lens to replace that focal range. What to say, the 24-200 beats the old zoom in every respect: sharpness, distortion, size and reaches 200mm with still excellent quality. Very satisfied with the purchase. Only negative note is the lack of the Af/Mf switch. Construction more plastic than 14-30 but it is not an S, it is there! |
 | sent on February 17, 2021 Pros: Focal range - compactness - weight - sharpness - no distortion at 24 mm. Cons: Low brightness is known, but it is good to know that it is already at 50mm (f/5.6). Opinion: Higher than expected, and to think that I was very doubtful for an "all-rounder" with a similar range of focal points. From a comparison (coarse) with Nikon 70-200 f/4 at 200mm and f/11 I did not detect appreciable differences. These emerge - measuredly - always at 200mm and f/6.3, after cutting out a lot and zooming in significantly. Before we unbalance the high price - however not cheap - it is essential to prove it. The only possible drawback is..... not to take it off almost ever, at the expense of more suitable optics in certain circumstances. Always keep in your bag. Grade 9.7 (rounded to 10). |
 | sent on December 08, 2020 Pros: Focal excursion, stabilization, practicality, sharpness, versatility Cons: Cost Opinion: I switched to this native z-series zoom to lighten my kit and have a single lens for my excursions, with no heavier adaptors and telephoto lenses to replace. Taking photos of landscape often with tripods I do not need F 2.8 lenses and this lens is the right compromise for its versatility, excellent results for colors and sharpness I am very satisfied. |
 | sent on November 11, 2020 Pros: Weight, size, sharpness Cons: just the price Opinion: I never thought I would buy such a "dark" lens, but with the Z6's excellent ISO resistance and dual lens and sensor stabilization, I decided to take the risk in the name of sometimes indispensable practicality. The lens is well built and with an impression of solidity (despite being made of plastic), the zoom ring flows well and the protrusion is compensated by an excellent weight balance, facing the attachment. Although the size is not negligible (about 2 cm shorter than a Nikon 24-70G 2.8, with minimal zoom) go around with the Z6 and this lens does not fatigue even after walking km, both in the mountains and in the plains. The focal excursion allows you to capture practically anything without having to disassemble lens and miss precious moments, the focus is fast and the general ergonomics makes it a perfect ally when you decide to travel lean. The quality is there, the colors are natural and the sharpness is noticeable almost on the entire frame. Of course there are no nanocrystals and it can not be used for astrophotography or portraits with a magical gradient... But these are not the uses for which it was produced. In conclusion, if you want to go out without strapless backpacks and with the intention of taking home always and in any case shots, I suggest buying them at all. Of course, if I wanted to take night photos or long exposures, I would support it with a fixed lens (today there are excellent and low weight) The only drawback is the price, in my opinion excessive. |
user65640  | sent on October 12, 2020 Pros: Compactness, sharpness, practicality, AF speed Cons: Cost Opinion: Honestly I would have hoped to pay it "less" but the price difference giving inside the 24-70S of the kit was not so exaggerated but buy it again at almost 1,000 euros probably I would never have done it. However, he is forgiven for using it with a generous focal excursion and even a sharpness that even open that surprised me because I would have expected to have to close it at least to F8 to 200 mm to get a decent sharpness and instead to F6.3 to 200 mm. As a construction it is beautiful solid, it transmits great sensations and goes well with my Z6. I was looking for something compact and easily transportable that wouldn't make me regret not taking "pro" optics and I think this lens was the best choice I could make. It must also be said that the sensor of the Z6 is really a very large sensor and this is a nice hand. I only mark a "light" 24 mm vignette, more present than the little brother 24-70 F4, but nothing so serious and incorrigible. |
| sent on August 27, 2020 Pros: Lightness, practicality, sharpness, handyman. Cons: It's not a 2.8. Opinion: The purchase of this lens was born from the fact that I have problems with my hands so I have difficulty keeping heavy goals for even short periods. I had booked the z 70-200 2.8 which is not yet on the market, the price of which you all know, but also its weight, we are at about 1 kilo and 440 grams that with the Z7 you exceed 2 kg. I saw the photos posted by Panizza made with the 24 200 both on this site and on social media, and I was impressed by its sharpness, dynamic range and resolution. I also delved into the videos on the net and the very positive reviews. I made an assessment on what were my needs and needs and the choice prevailed when buying this lens at the price of 960 euros. I am satisfied and aware, and I do not intend to make inappropriate comparisons, we understand each other. But from the first shots I made I was very impressed and satisfied with the results confirming the judgments that I had read and viewed with a further data that having a weight of 550 grams in the hand you do not feel. I know very well that it is a 4-6.3, but I assure you that it makes its beautiful figure in terms of results and I recommend it not only as a handyman. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
