24-120mm f4S Nikkor

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
Just messing around but these might show some detail. I haven't been able to really get out with it yet.

JPEG out of camera, resized to 4MP 74mm f/5 1/400 ISO 100
DSC_3908 Copy.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.



JPEG out of camera, resized to 4MP 120mm f/4 1/640 ISO 100
DSC_3904 Copy.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Ado Wolf said:
I guess when shooting during the day, VR is not as important as when shooting sunrises and sunsets (handheld). I once used the 24-70 F4 (no VR) on my Z50 and noticed that some photos were actually not as sharp (motion blur). Maybe the IBIS does offer enough stabilisation that no VR is required.
Click to expand...

I accidentally took this at 1/5 of a second. I normally wouldn't try to do a handheld shot this slow but I forgot to check the settings and I was surprised how well it turned out. We were just walking around at sunset so it was getting dark. I know it's only at 74 and not 120 but I was still surprised. This is not a keeper photo by any means, just out walking around having fun with a camera and a new lens 🙂

74mm f/5.6 1/5 sec ISO 400 Exposure comp +1.3
DSC_3931 COPY.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Mr. Goodkat said:
I was in Aperture priority and had the EC turned up from another shot along with the ISO set to 400. Like I said I really didn't think about the shot. I might have been manually focusing also.
Click to expand...
I have an F lens 24-120 f4 that is my go to lens for my D850. I would like to see that shot at 24mm to get some more of the tree in the shot and the original seems to me to be a bit overexposed. That is why the actual ISO question. Seems like it would make a really good composition at 24mm. I like the image! ;)
 
Member's gallery
dwillar said:
I have an F lens 24-120 f4 that is my go to lens for my D850. I would like to see that shot at 24mm to get some more of the tree in the shot and the original seems to me to be a bit overexposed. That is why the actual ISO question. Seems like it would make a really good composition at 24mm. I like the image! ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah it's definitely overexposed. I'll be sure to get some better pictures on here. I've been a little busy and I'm not too familiar with the area in in since wife and I travel full time.
 
Member's gallery
I'm very happy with the 24-120 mm f/4 S that came with my Z6III. Very sharp and contrasted. It doesn't have a lot of reach for wildlife photography, but it's nice to have f/4 at 120 mm in a zoom lens and the relatively large angle at 24 mm (84°) at the same time.

The lack of VR in the lens has never been any trouble; the Z6III's built-in VR is largely enough, even at 120 mm. I even saw a noticeable difference when I tested a Tamron 50-400 mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD (that's a mouthful!) at comparable focus lengths. That Tamron lens has a (pretty average) VR and it was quite less effective than the Z6III built-in VR alone with the 24-120. The Tamron is also heavier, so maybe the comparison isn't fair (and it probably needs its VR at 400, but that isn't the point).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top