Finally bit the bullet and grabbed a Z6II last month after my D750 shutter finally gave out on me after years of abuse. Im heading out to the Olympic Peninsula in late September for about ten days of hiking and honestly I really just want to bring one lens that can handle the whole trip because I'm sick of carrying a heavy bag and swapping glass in the rain. Ive done a fair bit of digging online and the consensus seems to be split between the 24-120mm f/4 S and the 24-70 f/4 S kit lens but I keep going back and forth on what actually makes sense for a daily driver.
The 24-120 gets amazing reviews for being sharp as a tack but some people on the forums say it feels pretty chunky and front-heavy if youre walking around a city or a trail all day long. Then there is that 28-75mm f/2.8 which is cheaper and faster but I read that the corner sharpness isnt quite there compared to the S-line stuff and I really value those clean edges for my landscape shots especially since I might print some of these later. My budget is sitting right around $1,100 - $1,200 max so the 24-120 is right at the edge of what I can afford if I find a decent sale or a used copy in good condition.
I guess my main hangup is whether that extra 50mm on the long end of the 24-120 is actually worth the weight penalty over the compact 24-70 f/4. I mostly do wide stuff but every now and then I see a bird or a far off peak I want to punch in on and I hate feeling limited. Has anyone here spent significant time with both? I dont want to be halfway up a trail in Washington wishing I had more reach but I also dont want a sore neck by day three from a lens thats too big for the body. Is there another sleeper option I'm missing for a one-lens-to-rule-them-all setup for the Z system or is the 24-120 really the king of the mountain like everyone says...
Just catching up on this... Honestly, I would suggest being careful with the 24-70 f/4 for a trip like Olympic. You are definitely gonna want that extra reach for the peaks and the occasional elk you'll spot. I have used both extensively and while the Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-120mm f/4 S is a bit of a chonk, it's way more versatile for a one-lens setup. Make sure to consider these tips:
- Get a Peak Design Capture Clip v3 to take the weight off your neck; it makes a huge difference on 10-day hikes.
- Check out the Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR if you really want to save weight, though the edges won't be as crisp as the S-line glass. I would stick with the 24-120mm f/4 S for your landscape prints. Just watch out for that front-heaviness when you are zooming in...
Re: "Just catching up on this... Honestly, I would..." - basically lived through this exact dilemma last summer. I spent years hauling heavy glass through the Cascades before I finally got tired of the neck pain. In my experience, folks get way too hung up on technical corner sharpness when they're mostly viewing photos on a laptop or small prints. I've tried many of these kits and that weight penalty really starts to bite when you're hiking in the rain and everything feels twice as heavy. Before you drop the cash, how big are you actually planning to print these landscape shots? If you aren't doing huge gallery wraps, you might not even notice the difference between the pro glass and the kit stuff. Also, do you find yourself using the wide end or the long end more often when you look back at your old D750 files? That usually tells the real story of what you'll actually miss out there on the trail.
