Nikon Z walk-around, general travel lens recommendations

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).

jhorsch

jhorsch

Active member
Member's gallery
We'll be traveling to India for what will primarily be a wildlife photography trip that will also include some street scene, architecture and portrait opportunities. I carry a Z9 and am considering the Z24-120mm f/4S for the non-wildlife photography. (I have the Z24-70mm for landscapes and long lenses for wildlife.)

Any thoughts about whether the 24-120 would be a good choice, or any other Z mount suggestions?
 
Member's gallery
jhorsch said:
We'll be traveling to India for what will primarily be a wildlife photography trip that will also include some street scene, architecture and portrait opportunities. I carry a Z9 and am considering the Z24-120mm f/4S for the non-wildlife photography. (I have the Z24-70mm for landscapes and long lenses for wildlife.)

Any thoughts about whether the 24-120 would be a good choice, or any other Z mount suggestions?
Click to expand...
The 24-120mm Z lens would be a fine choice for general travel photography.

That said, I personally use the 24-70mm f/4 lens for that purpose as it's small and light and covers most of the focal lengths I typically use in general walk around travel photography. If you want the extra focal length at the long end for the types of shots you're after and it's in the budget I think you'll be happy with the 24-120mm but FWIW I've been very happy with the small 24-70mm f/4 lens for that kind of use though I typically pair it with the Z8 for a small unobtrusive travel photography kit.
 
Member's gallery
jhorsch said:
We'll be traveling to India for what will primarily be a wildlife photography trip that will also include some street scene, architecture and portrait opportunities. I carry a Z9 and am considering the Z24-120mm f/4S for the non-wildlife photography. (I have the Z24-70mm for landscapes and long lenses for wildlife.)

Any thoughts about whether the 24-120 would be a good choice, or any other Z mount suggestions?
Click to expand...
Spent 3 weeks in SE Asia last fall. Took my Z8 wtih 24-120 f4 and 14-30 f4. Perfect for the trip. Never wanted for another option.
 
Member's gallery
jhorsch said:
We'll be traveling to India for what will primarily be a wildlife photography trip that will also include some street scene, architecture and portrait opportunities. I carry a Z9 and am considering the Z24-120mm f/4S for the non-wildlife photography. (I have the Z24-70mm for landscapes and long lenses for wildlife.)

Any thoughts about whether the 24-120 would be a good choice, or any other Z mount suggestions?
Click to expand...
If you didn't have the 24-70, then the 24-120 would certainly be on the list. Do you have any longer glass that can fill the gap and serve dual purpose such as a 100-400? If so, then you don't really need to add anything. There are some folks lusting for the 28-400, though I can't imagine that it will perform that well.

Recently, I struggled with a similar issue and though I have wide stuff for astro and long telephotos, the only shorter FL lens I had was the 70-180 f/2.8. It didn't make sense to me to add the 24-120 f/4 as they already overlap on the long end and it's not super sharp on the edges for landscapes. In the end, I bought something small, discrete, light, and super sharp, the Tamy 28-75 f/2.8 and didn't regret it. It was on the camera 90+% of the time and when I needed something longer, the 70-180 was perfect. Good luck and let us know what you decide.
 
Member's gallery
For the way I shoot…the 24-120. Of I wanted a lighter kit then take the Z7II/24-70 instead of the Z8 Or maybe the Z7II/24-200 if I thought a bit more reach would be needed…and would substitute the Z8 if SD or better AF for wildlife seemed more important than small/light. The longer zoom…while fine…isn’t as good as the other two but sometimes reach is good…and if things permit the 100-400 would be my next added lens…and I would probably sacrifice the 70-100 range if I did that since cropping or DX helps solve that. Since it’s a wildlife trip too…I would take a 2 lens combo…one for reach and one for walking around.
 
Member's gallery
TurtleCat said:
Another vote for the 24-120. It suits the needs in most situations.
Click to expand...
Yep…took it, the 100-400, and 14-30 to northern England (Yorkshire Dales and Lakes District) last summer and I don’t think either of the last 2 ever came out of the backpack…the 24-120 was plenty and TBH the 24-70/4 and Z8 alone would have been just fine as well and lighter. On a non bucket list trip with both travel, city, architecture, landscape and wildlife trip where reach wasn’t a big issue then the 24-70, 10l-400, TC and 2 Z8s for a spare in case of failure would be plenty for me. Africa, Costa Rica, Iceland…yeah I’m taking the heavier kit…but UK or Ireland or EU.where travel and those other things are as important as the wildlife…smaller and lighter is just fine.

As another post said…the 2.8 zooms are technically a little better and that’s true at 2:1 in LR…but once downsampled for output a lot of those differences get done away with by physics and for most shots taken at f4 one will be hard pressed to tell the difference in output images because nobody looks at 2:1 after PP is done, they look at output…and the 2.8 lenses are bigger, heavier, more expensive, and take more space in your carryon/backpack. Are the 2.8s worth it? Maybe…but for me most of the time unless I know I’m going to be shooting at 2.8 the weight penalty makes them lose. I can probably count on one hand the number of times I’ve used my 70#200/2.8…but when I got my Z7II as my first Z it was the only decent tele that Nikon had introduced…and for me it’s simply too short almost all the time. If I were buying into Z from scratch today…I would not get it because #.8 isn’t important to me for much Of my needs.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
@jhorsch You say you have the Nikon Z 24-70 but you do not say which one. They make two: one with an f4 aperture and one with an f2.8 aperture. Whichever one you have, it seems it would be a good choice, though of course the 24-120 would give you extra reach and be a bit more useful. If you get it, do you plan to sell your current 24-70?
 
Member's gallery
jhorsch said:
We'll be traveling to India for what will primarily be a wildlife photography trip that will also include some street scene, architecture and portrait opportunities. I carry a Z9 and am considering the Z24-120mm f/4S for the non-wildlife photography. (I have the Z24-70mm for landscapes and long lenses for wildlife.)

Any thoughts about whether the 24-120 would be a good choice, or any other Z mount suggestions?
Click to expand...
Not a fan. I bought it as an all-purpose, but I never reach for it, always take the 2.8 zooms instead. To my eye, they are far better when it comes to 3d pop and general optical performance (of course, far more expensive and heavier).
 
Member's gallery
I used the 28-300mm f-mount lens in Europe and it was a great lens. The new Z 28-400mm lens is even better. It is no larger when collapsed than the 24-120m f/4 lens. The tele focal lengths are invaluable when photographing from a smal boat or capturing architectural details. It also uses the 77mm size filters.

That lens along with a 14-24mm f/2.8 or similar lens is all one needs. I would also take a speedlight that I can fire with it off the camera.
 
Member's gallery
When I bought my Z9 in late 2022, I got the 24-120mm f4 S lens for it and skipped both Z mount Nikon 24-70mm lenses. Either one or both of them could work for you depending on focal lengths needed. I have not missed the 24-70mm.
 
Member's gallery
Even though I have the Zf and 24-120, I am going to get a Z50 with the 18-50 lens for walking around when I go to Oaxaca for Day of the Dead. It is so compact and light I can carry it with me everywhere in a very small shoulder bag. I read a review of it on Photography Life of the lens which is very favourable and I was amazed at the sharpness of the photos. I won't be using it of anything challenging, just normal street photography. The Z DX 25 1.7 also looks interesting and the price is ridiculously low right now on sale. That would be the equivalent of a fast 35 mm..
 
Member's gallery
Obviously, "Streetsweeper" zooms are a compromise - prioritizing versatility over edge to edge sharpness. However the modern zooms for the Z System are impressive optics, which reflects on all the R&D Nikon has invested developing its 3 Dragons and the f4 zooms through several iterations over 4 decades ....since the late 1970s, in the case of the 70-200's.

The 24-120 f4S is a significant improvement from the F-mount G version, which I traded onwards. I have the 24-120 f4S for its widely recognized features, including image quality, colours, versatility etc. This zoom is ideal for landscape photography

I also often pack the compact, light Z 70-180 f2.8 for its advantages of close-up subjects as well as the tighter framing. The Z Tamnikon f2.8 Trio are the affordable versatile choices, ideal for travel and hiking etc

Nikon 70-180 Official Announcement / Discussion Thread

In addition the the new 180-600mm, Nikon has also announced the new 70-180 2.8. We saw the lens in person and although I didn't have time to really try it, it seemed like a nice, compact lens at an affordable price. We may end up getting one just because the 70-200 2.8 is a little large when...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com

Z 70-180 : Verdict

I agree with your conclusion. Tamron, whose largest/controlling shareholder is Sony makes both adapted and private-labeled lenses and is the largest lens company in the world. Their agreement with Sony is that they would not sell clones, because most likely the Sony G lenses are manufactured by...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
fcotterill said:
Obviously, "Streetsweeper" zooms are a compromise - maximizing versatility for edge to edge sharpness. However the modern zooms for the Z System are impressive optics, which reflects on all the R&D Nikon has invested developing its 3 Dragons and the f4 zooms through several iterations over 4 decades ....since the late 1970s, in the case of the 70-200's.

The 24-120 f4S is a significant improvement from the F-mount G version, which I traded onwards. I have the 24-120 f4S for its widely recognized features, including image quality, colours, versatility etc. This zoot is ideal for landscape photography

I also often pack the compact, light Z 70-180 f2.8 for its advantages of close-up subjects as well as the tighter framing. The Z Tamnikon f2.8 Trio are the affordable versatile choices, ideal for travel and hiking etc

Nikon 70-180 Official Announcement / Discussion Thread

In addition the the new 180-600mm, Nikon has also announced the new 70-180 2.8. We saw the lens in person and although I didn't have time to really try it, it seemed like a nice, compact lens at an affordable price. We may end up getting one just because the 70-200 2.8 is a little large when...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com

Z 70-180 : Verdict

I agree with your conclusion. Tamron, whose largest/controlling shareholder is Sony makes both adapted and private-labeled lenses and is the largest lens company in the world. Their agreement with Sony is that they would not sell clones, because most likely the Sony G lenses are manufactured by...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com
Click to expand...
I also have the 24-120 f4S lens which I use as my general walkabout lens on my Z8,
Very happy with the results and way better than my F mount version.
Gavin
 
Member's gallery
Wow - no shortage of opinions here.

Although I have the Z24-70 f/2.8 for now I'm inclined to bring it and rent the 24-120 to test it out. (My wife's coming too so we can spread the lenses between us for packing purposes.) We're not traveling to India until March, so plenty of time to ponder this (and change my mind a few times).
 
Member's gallery
jhorsch said:
Wow - no shortage of opinions here.

Although I have the Z24-70 f/2.8 for now I'm inclined to bring it and rent the 24-120 to test it out. (My wife's coming too so we can spread the lenses between us for packing purposes.) We're not traveling to India until March, so plenty of time to ponder this (and change my mind a few times).
Click to expand...
I have both the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-120 f/4. I find myself enjoying photos from the 2.8 more often but there are times when the extra reach of the 24-120 is useful. It’s good that you have time to make a decision. Renting the 24-120 is a great idea.

Yes indeed, there are lots of opinions on this topic!
 
Member's gallery
After saying I was going to get a Z 50 with the 16-50 lens, I tried out the combination and quickly realized I have been spoiled using my Zf and found the Z 50 was like a toy. So now I'm thinking of the Z 40 on my Zf. I also would consider a good manual focus 35 mm lens that is really small. Any suggestions for such a manual lens?
 
Member's gallery
Surprised no one mentioned the Z24-200. I tried and wrote off several of Nikon’s superzooms for my D mounts and found them to be just too soft to consider. With my D850, if I needed to travel light, I relied on the Nikon D mount 24-120/4 G which yielded acceptable results. I currently own a Z8 and 24-70and 70-200, both 2.8 and extraordinarily sharp, but at my age, when on vacation, I simply cannot lug around the 2.8’s. A buddy suggested the Z 24-200/6.3 and to my surprise, it performed head and shoulders over the D mount one lens predecessors. If the Z 24-120 is too short for a 1 lens solution, I urge you to give the 24-200/6.3 a try. It can’t compete head to head with the 2.8’s, but it does a surprisingly good job in most cases, even at 200 wide open. I am learning to live with the slow aperture and smaller than expected drop in IQ. Best yet - I paid $700 for a brand new one.

suggest you try one out.
 
Member's gallery
RickW said:
Surprised no one mentioned the Z24-200. I tried and wrote off several of Nikon’s superzooms for my D mounts and found them to be just too soft to consider. With my D850, if I needed to travel light, I relied on the Nikon D mount 24-120/4 G which yielded acceptable results. I currently own a Z8 and 24-70and 70-200, both 2.8 and extraordinarily sharp, but at my age, when on vacation, I simply cannot lug around the 2.8’s. A buddy suggested the Z 24-200/6.3 and to my surprise, it performed head and shoulders over the D mount one lens predecessors. If the Z 24-120 is too short for a 1 lens solution, I urge you to give the 24-200/6.3 a try. It can’t compete head to head with the 2.8’s, but it does a surprisingly good job in most cases, even at 200 wide open. I am learning to live with the slow aperture and smaller than expected drop in IQ. Best yet - I paid $700 for a brand new one.

suggest you try one out.
Click to expand...

Here are 2 images shot with that Z24-200/6.3. Granddaughter - @87mm, 1/100th, 7.1. Butterfly - @200mm 1/500th, 7.1
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
I used the 28-300mm f-mount lens in Europe and it was a great lens. The new Z 28-400mm lens is even better. It is no larger when collapsed than the 24-120m f/4 lens. The tele focal lengths are invaluable when photographing from a smal boat or capturing architectural details. It also uses the 77mm size filters.

That lens along with a 14-24mm f/2.8 or similar lens is all one needs. I would also take a speedlight that I can fire with it off the camera.
Click to expand...
I agree I had the 24-200 mm which I replaced with the 28-400mm f4-f8 and did my own unscientific tests vs 100-400 f4-5.6 70-200 f2.8, a Sony 200-600mm adapted as well as the 180-600mm lenses. It’s a sharp lens at all positions and you can’t beat the range. With the new denoise in Lightroom I have takes some 10,000 + ISO animal images and had excellent results the the F8 on the 28-400mm is not too much of a downside. IMHO. If you get one make sure you test your copy before any real serious image making. The new Z lenses all seem to be good out of the box though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top