この Z 6IIに取り付けたレンズがNIKKOR Z 28-75mm f/2.8です。. 質量：約565g. サイズ：約75mm×120.5mm. 私が今使っているNIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/4 Sと同程度の重さながら、価格は下回ります。. さらに、憧れのNIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/2.8 Sに比べると3割ほど軽く、価格は半分以下！. F2.8通し Build quality of the 24-70 is much better. Range for the 24-120 is much better. VR can be advantages to some shooting styles. 24-70 is more expensive. 24-70 focuses a bit faster. The Nikon 24-120mm has more distortion and vignetting than the 24-70mm but not an issue if you PP with modern tools. For travel, zoo, and other out and about shooting, I’d take the 24-120 any day of the week - the extra range is definitely more useful than the extra stop when you’ve got sunlight to work with. The 24-70 f/2.8 (and by extension the 28-75 f/2.8) is a surprisingly specialized lens. The choices for Heaton are the Nikon 24-70mm Z f/2.8, Nikon 24-70mm Z f/4.0, and Nikon 24-120mm Z f/4.0. Naturally, some will lean to the f/2.8 lens as it is likely to pack the highest quality.
In this video, we're comparing the Nikon 24-120 f/4 and the Nikon 24-200 f/4-6.3 lens for Nikon Z. We'll explore which one is better for your needs, and whic
Los Angeles, California. Mar 3, 2012. #3. The 24-120 is a totally different type of lens. If you use f/2.8 a lot, to freeze action, or to cream backgrounds, the 24-120 won't satisfy you. However, if you want more in focus, and your subjects aren't moving, VR would be more useful than f/2.8. In terms of weight, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S weighs 500 grams (1.1 pounds), while the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S weighs 630 grams (1.4 pounds) – yes, the 24-70mm f/4 S wins, but it’s not a dramatic difference. The 24-70mm f/4 S is a bit more portable, but the size difference is only about 2 cm (3/4 inch). paul wassermann wrote: I have the 24-70 2.8 and without question it is the best all around zoom I have ever used. Just love it! By coincidence I just bought this afternoon, from Craigs List, the Sigma version of the 24-105 (for $550) and although I haven't taken more than a handful of shots, so far it is impressiveno vignetting at 24mm, razor sharp in the center A7rII with MC-11 adapter. Imo yes, the 24-70 2.8 is as good or imo better than any of the 1.8 primes. Kinda makes them redundant to be honest. Also, I much prefer the colors, contrast etc. From the 24-70 f2.8, even compared to the 50 1.2 55rD1o.
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/181
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/657
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/55
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/427
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/905
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/238
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/30
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/192
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/120
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/384
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/791
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/997
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/517
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/438
  • nza3q3wcj6.pages.dev/632

    • nikon z 24 120 f4 vs 24 70 f2 8