Nikon Z walk-around, general travel lens recommendations

[ccirelli]

Super easy question YES it's an excellent choice, amazing images quality and so versatile. Having the extra lens function button is great too.

If you don't need the extra reach but still want to save some weight over the 24-70 2.8, then the 24-70 4 is also a great travel option. But if you're not getting the 24-70 4 used, I would definitely not choose it over the 24-120 4 for the $100 (off-sale) price difference.

I used to have the 24-70 4 and 24-200, but sold them both and consolidated to the 24-120 4. It sees a LOT of use and is generally with me everywhere. The 24-200 was really good too, but not on the level of the 24-120's image quality and of course the 24-200 has a variable aperture of 4-6.3.

Hope this helps!

Any thoughts about whether the 24-120 would be a good choice, or any other Z mount suggestions?

 

[ccirelli]

Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 Lens (Nikon Z)

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?

 

[O]

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?

1) Myself i wouldn't be walking around the streets with a Z9.

2) Myself i would take the 24-70 F2.8 Period.

3) Its an expensive trip.

The F2.8 MFR is 3-1 F4 is 5 -1, a little overcast, or shadows, evening shots iso climbs, sorry F4 is not a deal maker here, 50mm versus F2.8 light gathering capacity, i mean if your in full perfect sun hey there much the same.

Its not that you have to shoot at F2.8 its about light gathering capacity, something you wish you had in spades sometimes.

50mm difference is nothing, test out how many steps forward or back you need to take, you may be surprised how little compromise there is if any at all, from memory its 1 or 2 steps or just over 1, i cant remember LOL.

Your using a 45mp sensor, remember pulling in 50mm in post is really nothing at all, that is if you even need to.

Are you after holiday snaps or quality shots.

Are you intending to do shots at night.

Only an opinion

 

[jbk2forum]

Good discussion.
I have the 2Z4-200mm and replaced it with the Z24-120. The f/4 aperture more important for the full range indoors and in for family pictures.
I did an evaluation of my last rip with the 24-200 and found that over 90% were at less than 120mm. And some of the keepers over 120mm, I probably could have stepped closer. I do know that having the F/4 for interiors (along with the ?14-30 f/4) will work out fine. The 24-120 is superb.
But..always a but..
I was out last weekend with my Lionel Messi 9 year old and took pics. While the Z8 and lens were great; I do think that I did not have enough reach.
Now, the question for me, at least, is.....Heh Jon, if you want a lens for sports then get a longer lens..if not you got the right lens.
So far, most discussions regarding travel, support the use of the 24-120 and no need for the 200. Am I crazy to think that I should bring the 24-200?
My plan is to sell it. 2nd thoughts??
Thanks.

 

[glsmith9823]

I tried a 24-200 F/4-6.3 instead of the 24-120. WOW!!! incredible images, lightweight, compact. One word of CAUTION: In numerous foreign airports, you may be asked to produce paperwork as to where the camera/lens were purchased. Many an unwary traveler has ended up paying foreign tax & having to battle later to be reimbursed.

 

[MJR]

for the 24-120. Balances very nicely on the Z9.

 

[Don'sPhotoStream]

if you are going to do street shooting in the cities, I recommend bringing a 14-30/4 as much of the action is right in your face. Smaller, lighter everything is better when moving through crowded back alleys and busy streets. If you go to Varanasi to see the nighttime cremations rituals, a f/2.8 lens or faster is nice to have.

 

[PeterM]

I adore my Z24-120 S on my Z8 and think that it works great for all-around and travel shooting. Recently, I picked up a refurbished Z 24-200 on sale, and was surprised at how sharp it is. I still prefer the image quality of the 24-120, but for hiking and travel photography where the added reach outweighs the need for wider aperture, the 24-200 is a good option. I would also recommend the Z14-30 f4 as a travel lens for city and architectural shots in tight spaces. It is very sharp, light, and small.

 

[Reno]

My "go to" walk-around combo is a Z14-30 f4 and 24-200 mm; I have many 12 x 18 prints from both lens' and am very satisfied with the color, contrast and sharpness. Both lens' are small and lightweight and easily hand hold-able. A small, light-weight tripod or platypod rounds out my "walk-around" kit. Looking into the 28-400 for future purchase.

 

[RLP]

I purchased the 24-70 f/4 and the 70-180 f2.8 lenses for my wife to use with the Z6II. The combined weight of the 2 lens is less than 70-200 f2.8.

 

[Erasmus667]

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?

I'm doing exactly the same holiday as you but in November. I'd suggest that you look at the separate thread I started about certain temples in India not allowing anything (including camera straps) which have leather in them.

I had the same dilemma as you when I upgraded to a Z7ii from a D800, ' do I go for the 24-70mm f4 or opt for the Z-equivalent of the f-mount 24-120mm which I'd used on the D800?'. I dealt with it by looking through the photographs I took during a holiday to Egypt last May seeing what the focal length was on each of them. A lot were in the 24-70 range. However, I found that if I hadn't have had the extra reach of the 120 lens then some of the shots taken where the focal length was between 71 and 120 simply wouldn't have been possible. I saw that Nikon was selling a refurbished Z7ii with a 24-120mm lens and I bought it. I've no regrets with either the body or the lens. I'm sure that if I'd gone for the 24-70 I would have very soon missed the extra reach that the 24-120 offers. That extra reach I believe will come in very handy in India when not photographing wildlife for which I'm using a D500 with 200-500 lens.

 

[JacobGM]

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?

I have a Z8 with 24-120 for general walk-about stuff, but often find myself reaching for my Zfc with 24mm 1/1.7 for ultimate pocketability. No IBS or VR, but the 36mm equivalent is super versatile for city and people. The combo makes for a super selfie setup that beats an iPhone (IMO). While it may be sacrilegious to bring Dx glass in to this convo, a 36mm (Eq) at 1.7 for that price is just nuts!

 

[O]

Its good and interesting to listen to peoples many different experiences, very handy to observe.

Remember you can flick your camera into DX crop mode as an option as well.

My friend she travels China Asia conducting tours for photographers, she only uses a Canon R 6 and 35mm prime, stitches, stacks, panos, Astro all hand held, never takes a tripod, lots of hiking. Amazing, speaks 7 languages and has excellent LR PS skills.

She wants reliability small light no bulk one lens one camera no dramas.

Only an opinion

 

[Ken Miracle]

My walk around lens is a Z800pf

I seldom use it but my Z24-120 is a great lens. It now gets used less since I got the Tamron z mount 35-150 F/2-2.8 when not shooting birds it is usually people indoors and out and the Tamron is amazing.

My wife just got a Z28-400 for her Z7II ... it is now pretty much welded to her camera and she had me sell her Z400 f/4.5 and now does not even think about taking the Z24-120 with her. She is into one lens option simplicity. Her favorite DSLR set up was a Tamron 18-400 on a D500.

 

[O]

My walk around lens is a Z800pf

I seldom use it but my Z24-120 is a great lens. It now gets used less since I got the Tamron z mount 35-150 F/2-2.8 when not shooting birds it is usually people indoors and out and the Tamron is amazing.

My wife just got a Z28-400 for her Z7II ... it is now pretty much welded to her camera and she had me sell her Z400 f/4.5 and now does not even think about taking the Z24-120 with her. She is into one lens option simplicity. Her favorite DSLR set up was a Tamron 18-400 on a D500.

35-150 F2.8 is a handy range especially being a F2.8. It fits Street and Landscape work nicely.
People in the club are using the 28-400 where they were using the 28-300 plus adapter, they seem very pleased.

 

[Johan Schmidt]

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?

Z 24-120 f4 is a great lens.

 

[Ken Miracle]

35-150 F2.8 is a handy range especially being a F2.8. It fits Street and Landscape work nicely.
People in the club are using the 28-400 where they were using the 28-300 plus adapter, they seem very pleased.

The Tamron 35-120 is unusual in that it is f/2 on the short end and moves up to f/2.8 on the long end. It all comes together to make it a real workhorse but it is heavier which will be a non starter for someone who is looking for very light weight.

Since my wife is not taking the Z28-400 off her camera I have only checked it out on her Z7II it may end up like the 28-300 was and be one of the best hidden gems in Nikon lineup.

 

[MukilteoManiac]

24-120 F4 for the win!

 

[Pasiani]

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?

For walk-around, hiking and city tours, my favorite focal range is 24-200 mm. With the 24-120 and a high resolution sensor, you can cover that range and capture anything from wide vistas to architectural details. The close focus distance is a welcome bonus.

 

[mathjak107]

if lighting is good the 28-400mm is a great travel lens …it isn’t my first choice when not traveling though . i used the older 28-300 for a trip to cuba and it was perfect

i much prefer my 24-70 f4 z and my 70-200 f2.8z with 1.4tc when not traveling , and where i can get away with it i love the 35mm f1.8 z

 

[Patrick M]

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?

I took the Z 8 with the z24-120mm f4 to Canada last fall, for the autumn colours. Took a ship from NY to Boston, then North to the St Lawrence , then down to Quebec and Montreal. That lens was all I needed. Superb.

 

[Ad Astra]

For architecture worth considering the Z 14-30, on occasions the extra wide angle will be useful especially interiors. When traveling I like to take the 50mm f1.8, the f1.8 is great for night scenes and low light conditions. Down to personal preference but for travel I find the natural field of view of the 50mm is ideal.

 

[glsmith9823]

I've really been satisfied with the 24-200/F4-6.3, light weight, fast, just about fits in the palm of your hand

 

[wotan1]

I really think people should experiment with better carrying straps they make carrying heavier lenses much easier.

I use z9's and I much prefer Sharper lenses. That almost always means something heavier.

I find using strips like Blackrapid or Holdfast make carrying gear that is a bit heavier a breeze.

Now that I have the Plena I can't imagine going on a special trip without it.

 

[mathjak107]

with actual photos i can’t say sharpness has been an issue in modern lenses for a decade , maybe longer .

at least as far as most photos go