I’ve had the lens since you tested it and I love it :)
Yes, it could be sharper, yes it could be brighter, but it still delivers what it promises. It can also take a lot, I (unfortunately) fell on the lens, nothing wobbles, it got a lot of sea water, everything fits. it has been bumped properly, holds, fits and the sharpness on the Z6 is good. With corrections in DXO, the results are really good even in the 135-200 range.
steve
July 3, 2022 2:35 am
The fact it drops to f/6.3 at 85mm is what is putting me off, that’s very slow, very soon.
Rich
February 19, 2022 1:40 am
Love those samples! This is a very comprehensive and accurate review of this lens – so well done! This lens is so excellent for street photography, travel, hiking and kayaking. The latter being the main reason why I bought it…..no changing lenses out on the water and I have a wide range of focal lengths is ridiculously helpful. For travel, so many of my images were f8-11 anyway and I don’t see much of a difference at those apertures vs my (now sold) 24-70 f4. There’s a lot of love towards the 24-120 f4S and I don’t think the 24-200 has received enough love. Personally, the 120-200mm gain is more beneficial to me than the difference in sharpness or aperture. If I want more perfection or a faster lens, neither of these lenses are ideal anyway, so the 24-200 does a better job of serving the niche purpose that I view it as. Thanks again for a great review!
Aruna
January 21, 2022 8:43 am
I have been using the 24-200 for more than a year with my Z6. I really like it and makes my travel kit simple. I used to own the D750 with 24-120 and always wanted a little bit more reach ( I used to own the D800 with 24-70 f/2.8 too). Looks like the new 24-120 f/4 is a tad bit sharper compared to this, but I think I am happy with this focal range. I even bought the Z 18-140 for my Z50, which makes a really light weight backpacking kit for me. Thanks Spencer!
Scott Segler
December 1, 2021 2:48 pm
Another well done and informative review, Spencer. Thank you. Regarding Lightroom lens adjustments, there is a check box on the lens grouping where you can turn off all lens adjustments. There is also a slider for lens distortion specifically, so you can turn it down or off if you want those corners just like in the NEF file. I often turn off lens distortion adjustments in Lightroom unless it’s really needed (like straight lines on a building). Again, thank you for a great review.
Vicki Jones
November 14, 2021 10:39 am
Would pairing this lens with the Z7ii be a bad idea for travel. I’m worried about the quality of 20×30 prints I might make later on? anyone?? Maybe, I should purchase the z6ii instead?
It’s not a *bad* idea as such. It’s my primary camera/lens combination. However, it does leave a fair bit of the Z7ii’s high density pixels on the table. If you intend to buy pro Z lenses in the future it may make sense; if you don’t, you’re probably better off with a Z6ii.
Personally I wish I’d have gone with the Z6ii and spent that extra thousand dollars on another lens. If you’re going with the Z6ii and the 24-200, I would also forgo the 24-70 f/4 kit lens and again, put that money into a different lens because the gain in quality over the shared focal length is pretty marginal IMO. It’s much more striking vs. say the 24-70 f/2.8.
45 megapixels is as much a curse as a blessing. My laptop chokes on that much data, and you need high quality, expensive glass to take advantage of it. My 16 core desktop does just fine, but a 4 year old 4 core laptop is *not* up to the task.
Just my experience; you can always downsample the Z7ii’s output in post to compensate for the resolution limitations of the 24-200.
Note that it’s still an excellent super-zoom; I just feel that the Z7ii has too much sensor for it.
Jen
November 11, 2021 4:57 pm
So I use the F mount (with adapter) 70-300 on my Z6 for wildlife photography. I also heavily use the 24-70 kit lens as my walk around/everyday lens. Would this lens be a good one to replace both of those? Yes, it doesn’t have the 300mm range but it’s close. I’m seriously considering getting this one. Plus it has the weather sealing, which my F lens doesn’t have. 🤔🤔🤔
Henry
October 28, 2021 5:46 pm
Hi Spencer, what a great article … so very helpful. When do you think you might size up the new 24-120/4.0 s lens? this might be my ideal lens if it is any good. Thanks, Henry
Yes – I am looking forward to the review for the new Nikon Z 24-120 f/4 S lens and the comparison to the Z 24-200 lens.
Jack
October 8, 2021 4:00 pm
sorry, another question. How is the focusing indoors? It is my experience that with some of the super zooms there is not a consistency with multiple images that are taken. I do a great deal of event photography and would love to use this lens . Please advise and thank you.
great review, it always seems the images taken with lens that are tested with outdoor images. How good is this lens in focusing indoors in lower light? My experience is the advantage my Nikon z6 has is that shooting with higher ISO numbers it still creates a clean image which should help this lens indoors. I wonder is that the case?
I’ve had the lens since you tested it and I love it :)
Yes, it could be sharper, yes it could be brighter, but it still delivers what it promises.
It can also take a lot, I (unfortunately) fell on the lens, nothing wobbles, it got a lot of sea water, everything fits. it has been bumped properly, holds, fits and the sharpness on the Z6 is good. With corrections in DXO, the results are really good even in the 135-200 range.
The fact it drops to f/6.3 at 85mm is what is putting me off, that’s very slow, very soon.
Love those samples! This is a very comprehensive and accurate review of this lens – so well done! This lens is so excellent for street photography, travel, hiking and kayaking. The latter being the main reason why I bought it…..no changing lenses out on the water and I have a wide range of focal lengths is ridiculously helpful. For travel, so many of my images were f8-11 anyway and I don’t see much of a difference at those apertures vs my (now sold) 24-70 f4. There’s a lot of love towards the 24-120 f4S and I don’t think the 24-200 has received enough love. Personally, the 120-200mm gain is more beneficial to me than the difference in sharpness or aperture. If I want more perfection or a faster lens, neither of these lenses are ideal anyway, so the 24-200 does a better job of serving the niche purpose that I view it as. Thanks again for a great review!
I have been using the 24-200 for more than a year with my Z6. I really like it and makes my travel kit simple. I used to own the D750 with 24-120 and always wanted a little bit more reach ( I used to own the D800 with 24-70 f/2.8 too). Looks like the new 24-120 f/4 is a tad bit sharper compared to this, but I think I am happy with this focal range. I even bought the Z 18-140 for my Z50, which makes a really light weight backpacking kit for me. Thanks Spencer!
Another well done and informative review, Spencer. Thank you. Regarding Lightroom lens adjustments, there is a check box on the lens grouping where you can turn off all lens adjustments. There is also a slider for lens distortion specifically, so you can turn it down or off if you want those corners just like in the NEF file. I often turn off lens distortion adjustments in Lightroom unless it’s really needed (like straight lines on a building). Again, thank you for a great review.
Would pairing this lens with the Z7ii be a bad idea for travel. I’m worried about the quality of 20×30 prints I might make later on? anyone?? Maybe, I should purchase the z6ii instead?
It’s not a *bad* idea as such. It’s my primary camera/lens combination. However, it does leave a fair bit of the Z7ii’s high density pixels on the table. If you intend to buy pro Z lenses in the future it may make sense; if you don’t, you’re probably better off with a Z6ii.
Personally I wish I’d have gone with the Z6ii and spent that extra thousand dollars on another lens. If you’re going with the Z6ii and the 24-200, I would also forgo the 24-70 f/4 kit lens and again, put that money into a different lens because the gain in quality over the shared focal length is pretty marginal IMO. It’s much more striking vs. say the 24-70 f/2.8.
45 megapixels is as much a curse as a blessing. My laptop chokes on that much data, and you need high quality, expensive glass to take advantage of it. My 16 core desktop does just fine, but a 4 year old 4 core laptop is *not* up to the task.
Just my experience; you can always downsample the Z7ii’s output in post to compensate for the resolution limitations of the 24-200.
Note that it’s still an excellent super-zoom; I just feel that the Z7ii has too much sensor for it.
So I use the F mount (with adapter) 70-300 on my Z6 for wildlife photography. I also heavily use the 24-70 kit lens as my walk around/everyday lens. Would this lens be a good one to replace both of those? Yes, it doesn’t have the 300mm range but it’s close. I’m seriously considering getting this one. Plus it has the weather sealing, which my F lens doesn’t have. 🤔🤔🤔
Hi Spencer, what a great article … so very helpful. When do you think you might size up the new 24-120/4.0 s lens? this might be my ideal lens if it is any good.
Thanks, Henry
Yes – I am looking forward to the review for the new Nikon Z 24-120 f/4 S lens and the comparison to the Z 24-200 lens.
sorry, another question. How is the focusing indoors? It is my experience that with some of the super zooms there is not a consistency with multiple images that are taken. I do a great deal of event photography and would love to use this lens .
Please advise and thank you.
Superzoom is normally for outdoor use.
great review, it always seems the images taken with lens that are tested with outdoor images. How good is this lens in focusing indoors in lower light? My experience is the advantage my Nikon z6 has is that shooting with higher ISO numbers it still creates a clean image which should help this lens indoors. I wonder is that the case?