Nikon 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Vibration Reduction NIKKOR Lens - Refurbished by Nikon U.S.A.

2015-04-14T20:00:00

I probably put over 10 hours into this lens to get it to produce sharp images. I tweaked the AF-Fine tune and stopped it down, but just couldn't get any sharp images. I'm a budget Nikon shooter and I have had success stopping down cheap lenses and precisely configuring AF-Fine tune, but this lens is a dud. I told myself I would never get rid of it since by spec it looks so good! However, I finally had enough with it and sold it. I guess the 24-85 VR is the only other option for a budget amateur FX shooter. Not sure if that one will be better since I'm inclined to believe that any lens with 24+ zoom is pushing optical limits. Yeah I know the 24-70 2.8 is great, but it's huge and I don't dump $1000+ into lenses as an amateur it's just not worth it. I'll stick with my 24mm 2.8 prime and the superb 28-105 D for now.

CapturedByHisDesign

Originally posted at

2012-02-23T19:00:00

Ive used more than 90% of Nikons lineup, im a Nikon Top 10 Contributor in Nikon reviews. With that said, this is the Sharpest lens available below $1,000 Period. Contrast, low light, low abberation, this lens is the buried treasure. Its an FX lens with DX crop thats unbelievable in quality. Get one and shoot. I guarantee youll never part with it. EVER!

Nicky N.

Originally posted at

2011-10-28T20:00:00

I've been shooting nikon for over 40 years and i can't find a thing wrong with this lens. I have both the the vr version and none vr. why i like nikon someone gave me the lens and it was not working ,i sent it in to nikon and thay fixed it at no charge and had it back in two weeks.

carlh

Originally posted at

2011-10-19T20:00:00

This is a good lens and works nicely. It isn't quite as wide angle as the 18-105, but it seems to be built sturdier and has less vignetting from what I've noticed. The big caveat is the BOKEH!!! Severe onioning and halos when shooting shallow depth of field and having something that will provide round blur in the background. If this weren't an issue I'd easily give it 4 1/2 stars.

scaryloud

Originally posted at

2011-07-19T20:00:00

Ken Rockwell got this one right in his review as one of Nikon's ten worst lens ever made. it is horribly soft focusing at any F stop below F8. and a ton of Barrel distortion at its wide 24mm. If I were Nikon I would have scrubbed this one from the line up as it does nothing to further Nikon or Nikkor's great reputation for superior products and quality.

dbeezo

Originally posted at

2011-06-25T21:00:00

I returned this lens after 10 days of use. I found it too slow to auto focus indoor.

RAYDINE B.

2011-05-09T20:00:00

I dreamed of owning a Nikon SLR since the very first F-models came out but it did not become reality until I retired in 2005. I was able to purchase a new D70 body and a new SWM VR ED IF 24-120 zoom lens to go with it. I soon found out that there is NO sharp point of focus. The infamous yardstick test shows that there is an area that is less unsharp than the surrounding area but nothing that can be called a sharp point of focus. 2 years later I bought a D90 body and it shows the same lack of performance with 4 different lenses one of which is not a Nikon brand. Do I expect too much from digital cameras and lenses? I sent the D70 and lens back to Nikon for repair with a letter of explanation but the camera returned no better than it had been and I was $300 poorer.

moses o.

Originally posted at

2011-04-14T20:00:00

This lense does not focus fast. The 24-120 f4g is much faster. On the nikon site it does not allow one to register the lense because there is no place to input the serial number. I have been told that Nikon no longer keeps track of products registered with them. Is this true or not. I have been a regular customer of Nikon since 1972 and find the service to be quite lacking at the present time.

Flash

Originally posted at

2011-04-14T20:00:00

I bought this lens over two years ago as part of a D700 DSLR Kit and still love it. The vibration reduction feature has helped a lot with my available light/hand held pictures and sports pictures. The camera with this lens is not too bulky to carry most anywhere. Occasionally the autofocus will be fooled but most often it autofocuses quickly and correctly.I've owned Nikons since the 1960's and consider myself a serious amateur.

Tom

Originally posted at

2011-04-13T20:00:00

I have owned this lens for several years. Eventually, I stopped using it very often, because of my disappointment with how soft my images were. I use a tripod and cable release for much of my nature photography, but the images tend to not be sufficiently sharp. I have an older NIikon 28-105 lens that is sharper. I went back to it. I also have a Nikon 14-24 F2.8 lens that is fantastic.

Larry

Originally posted at

2011-04-11T20:00:00

One of the worst lenses I have ever owned. Soft focus for family groups is unacceptable.

NIkonPro

Originally posted at

2011-03-07T19:00:00

I bought a refurbished one, no more brand new available, and i returned it because the inner barrel is too wobbly. I noticed also that picture taken from 80-120 is too dark/under exposed. sometimes it's having hard time focusing indoor.

RAYDINE B.

2011-01-23T19:00:00

Be shy of this one, it should say "Vivitar Series One......NOT NIKKOR

ROBERT B.

2011-01-11T19:00:00

I bought this lens as a lightweight option (compared to my 24-70 f2.8 Nikkor) to carry around all the time. I was not thinking of it as a great lens, just one to have all the time. Having shot it a lot now, I have to say it is extremely sharp and contrasty and is a top notch zoom.

Tom

2010-12-26T19:00:00

I owned this lens for quite some time and never really found it to be as poor as some have claimed. Than again, I am not a professional and I did not demand things from the lends that I knew it would not produce, given the price point of it. I recently sold it, only to upgrade to the new Nikon 28-300 mm lens, which allows me to leave my 70-300 mm lens home in a lot of situations. Overall, I must say that I was very satisfied with my 24-120 mm f 3.5 lens while I had it and put it to a lot of good use.

mre

Originally posted at

2010-12-07T19:00:00

I owned the original 24-120 'D' model, the one with the aperture ring, so I was intrigued when Nikon developed and sold and newer model. This is a great wedding lens. It isn't that sharp, but that works in your favor since Brides really don't want images that are that sharp, particularly if they reveal flaws. It's just sharp enough to get the job done.

Nikonhugh

Originally posted at

2010-10-12T20:00:00

I've had a love/hate/hate relationship with this lens. It covers a wide range of focal lengths, and occasionally I can get a tack sharp image. But as someone else indicated, the AF is buggy and gets way confused. Worse, this is an early VR lens, and the mechanism constantly shifts. The net result are images that are very soft, and unacceptable at the pro level. I used it only because it is compact & there was nothing else available without continually changing lenses. Nikon should've updated this lens a long time ago. Now I see they finally have. Time to get out the credit card.

TEQ

Originally posted at

2010-08-31T20:00:00

I've used less expensive, and more expensive Nikkors. The 24-120 may not be perfect, but what lens is. My D90 works very good with it. Brilliant colors, and crisp images. I like the metal ring over the plastic ring. If you need a lens with more specialized features, and can lay out the bucks, go for it. But for an every day user, this lens does what it's designed to do for it's price range as well.

G&L B.

Originally posted at

2010-08-20T20:00:00

One of my least favorite lenses. The kit lens that came with my wife's D60 is faster focusing and has batter sharpness. This lens is just too soft on my D3 and D700 and is constantly hunting focus.

Wedding P.

Originally posted at

2010-08-11T20:00:00

I initially enjoyed this lens when I purchased my D700 but the thing that i dont understand is why Nikon doesnt provide higher end kit lenses for their higher FX cameras. like a 24-120 f/4, or make the 18-35 f/4 a kit lens for the new ones. All together i wish this lens was better just add 400 more and make it better.

trust p.

Originally posted at

2010-08-01T20:00:00

There is no such thing as a perfect lense, but as far as multi-purpuse goes this 24-120 mm is a must. It is true that a 70-200 mm gives you sharper images, but its unfair to compare them, given the huge price difference. Then again depends on what are you going to use it for. If I am outdoors and there is plenty of light, I would probably have this one on, just because of the weight. Would be a 5 star if it was a f/2.8

Mike23

Originally posted at

2010-07-31T20:00:00

This is a very good everyday lens, and i would recommend it to anyone! I get crisp clear pictures no matter what!

nikon e.

Originally posted at

2010-07-31T20:00:00

Rumor is a new version of this lens is coming out shortly. I will be the first in line if its what is being reported. A 24-120 F4 VR. The old version has lots of detractors carping about its sharpness. I have 2 of these lenses and sharpness has not been an issue. On a FX body this focal is a good one lens only walk about option ,

MJR

Originally posted at

2010-07-30T20:00:00

Purchased the lens as part of the package with the Nikon D700. The lens is heavy, and when added to the D700 it makes a substantial load. The lens is not as sharp as my other Nikon lenses, but satisfactory for what I do. Although it supplies a convenient range, it is not quite wide enough nor long enough. A range of 18-200 would fit my needs much better. Finishing and mechanisms are smooth as silk.

Bill

Originally posted at

2010-07-29T20:00:00

A 24-120VR on an FX camera is NOT as useful as an 18-200VR on a DX camera. It comes up short of being equal to the wide angle and telephoto equivalents of the 18-200. My 24-120 is not sharp wide open at the edges. Not even close. Stop down a bit and it is a good general purpose lens. Fine with SB CLS flash. The Nikon shooters need a better FX version of a wide to tele zoom. I suggest a 24-240VR, a 25-250VR or a 28-280VR for the FX line-up.

Mr B.

Originally posted at

2010-07-29T20:00:00

I've had a 24-120mm AFD lens for several years. I hesitated to buy a second lens with the same focal length and aperture range but I'm glad I did. The auto-focus is much faster than the old lens and the VR is a nice feature. It is easier to use with polarizers since the front element doesn't rotate. I wish it was wasn't a "G" lens, however. With my F5 it is a dream, but with the N90 it can only be used in program or shutter priority mode. The N90 also doesn't support VR, although it does support the AF-S function. It's a great all purpose lens, but not a replacement for ultra wides, telephotos, or close-up lenses. It's also good to have some fast lenses such as the 50mm F1.4 and the 180mm F2.8 for low light conditions.

Film f.

Originally posted at

2010-07-29T20:00:00

I use this lens on a D3 and the photographs that I take with it are crisp, clear and exceed my expectations. I use it for 80 percent of my photographs and I am always impressed. It is light and comfortable, and well balanced on my camera. I find the focal length range perfect for everything from events to industrial work. The lens focuses very fast, the zoom is well damped, and I have no lens creep, The shade works very well, and provides a little extra protection for he front lens element. The VR mode is the best part of this lens and really pays off in low light settings. This lens is everything Nikon is known for in its optics line. I have yet to find any faults.

Vapor

Originally posted at

2010-07-29T20:00:00

Inspite of so many negative review I love this lens. It worls as designed. I'm an advanced non-pro. Lens is great for travel; the only one I used on a recent trip to Hawaii.

Anvar R.

Originally posted at

2010-07-29T20:00:00

I have been using this lens for over 5 years as my principal all around lens with excellent results. I've used it with a D70, D200 and D300 body.

byzvi

Originally posted at

2010-07-29T20:00:00

I rely on this lens; it is not one I got and don't use. It is my portrait lens, and delivers sharp, crisp images with great edge-to-edge light transmission. The VR is very good, and it is my go-to lens when I think I will be in those circumstances. Good weight, good size, easy to use, and does everything it says it should and the rep of Nikon insists it should.

lightbykane

Originally posted at