Jump to content

The above adverts really do help Fotozones. Please click on them if they are relevant to you. Not seeing them? Just exclude Fotozones from your ad blocker. Thanks!

- - - - -

Nikon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G AF-S

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Poll: Rate this lens (30 member(s) have cast votes)

Rate this lens

  1. 1 Star (appalling) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 2 Stars (below par) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted 3 Stars (average) (9 votes [30.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

  4. 4 Stars (above average) (19 votes [63.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 63.33%

  5. 5 Stars (outstanding) (2 votes [6.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.67%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Dallas


    Fotozones Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,169 posts
  • LocationDurban, South Africa
  • Edit my pics?:Yes

Posted 23 October 2007 - 11:40

Please post your opinions of this lens here. This topic will be indexed on our LENSES page. Please keep your comments related to your experiences with the lens in question.

Clicking on an ad just once a day will help me tremendously with financing this site. 

You can also support the site by buying your gear from the affiliate advertisers below (use these links):

Amazon.com | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Adorama | B&HThinkTankPhoto | Digital REV | OWC 

Alternatively you can DONATE via PayPal (donor list)


Follow Me On: social-facebook-box-blue-icon.png social-twitter-box-blue-icon.png YouTube-icon.png google-icon.png 

#2 Nikoncam1


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts

Posted 19 January 2008 - 22:10

got this lens for use on my D3 and thus far have found it to be a mixed bag as far as image quality is concerned.  at 24mm it's sharpness is perhaps a little above average with darkened corners wide open.  by 50mm sharpness gets better but not  up to my 50mm 1.8.  between 70-85 this lens really shines and comparred side by side to my 70-200vr from 70-85mm the two are VERY close in center sharpness, essentially too close to call....amazing.

build quality is up to par with other plastic bodied Nikon lenses i have and it has a metal as opposed to plastic lens mount like some other low end Nikon lenses but it lacks a rubber gasket around the lens mount to limit debris entry.  auto focus is fast and accurate but sometimes slightly misses in low light.
image quality:
24mm 3.5 stars
50mm 4 stars
70-85mm 4.5 stars

#3 Bravin Neff

Bravin Neff

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts
  • LocationRoyal Oak, Michigan

Posted 22 January 2008 - 21:04

My feelings echo Nikoncam1's almost exactly. I will add that the darkened corners go away pretty quickly when stopping down.

I think this lens is a great walkaround lens in terms of the price paid. If the world never experienced DX but rather DSLR cameras had always been FX, this lens is the one everyone would have gotten instead of 18-70 DX kit versions. Incidentally, they look and perform the same, albeit with shifted focal lengths.

The bokeh is pretty bad, though.
Manufacturing engineer by day, musician at night, philosopher by training.

#4 Dinosaur_Hotel



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • LocationMonterey

Posted 26 January 2008 - 21:08

I love(d) this lens.

I shot it professionally as my daily photojournalism lens. It served me great until one shoot when internally it fell apart for no apparent reason.

It was sharp, contrast-y and handled well. For $300 USD new, it's hard to beat.

~ nic
Nic Coury
Staff Photographer
Monterey County Weekly
Nikon D2H and a variety of Nikkor lenses.

#5 stenman


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts

Posted 26 March 2008 - 22:29

My copy is anything but sharp when compared to the Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 or the 24-70mm f2.8. It may be fine for people photography but for landscape use it fall short by a large degree. It may be a good value for the money but it really is not sharp enough to satisfy me or my clients.

#6 Westside guy

Westside guy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts
  • LocationThe soggy side of Washington state

Posted 08 November 2008 - 22:06

I've been using this lens on my D700 (full frame) - it's the one that's generally on my camera while it's in the bag. As long as you are willing to stay a stop or two away from the maximum aperture, it performs very well. Wide open center performance is still rather good, but gets softer as you move toward the corners. Performance improves as you move away from 24mm - I probably wouldn't rely on this as my main wide-angle option (it's not bad; but there are certainly much better lenses at 24mm).

I think it's unrealistic to expect a non-pro lens to match pro glass at all apertures and focal lengths - so none of what I wrote should be considered a criticism. As long as you understand this lens' strengths and weaknesses, it will reward you with great images.

  • How long have you used the item? I've owned this lens for about five or six months.
  • What did you specifically buy it for? I wanted a good quality, lower-weight walk-around lens.
  • Has the lens lived up to your expectations? Yes.
  • Would you recommend the item to others? I would certainly recommend this lens, but I'd want to be sure they understood its strengths and weaknesses.

#7 muralin

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 21 December 2008 - 03:05

I tested the 24-85 against the 18-200 (in the range covered by both). any aperture wider than 6.3, the 24-85 is not sharp and consistently worse than my 18-200 throughout the range. Pretty disappointing. it seems to be quite sharp and better than 18-200 between f8 & f16. My tests were done on the D300. I'll be getting my D700 next week.

i may end up biting the bullet and get the 24-70 after I save a few more $s.

#8 vague_logic



  • Life Member
  • 16 posts
  • LocationNewent

Posted 09 November 2009 - 21:10

After reading some good reviews, I took a gamble and bought a secondhand one through ebay to use with my D700. It's certainly good value for money, light weight and fast focussing. Mine is soft just on the left hand side at large apertures though you need to magnify to see that. I've used it for professional work though now it only goes out for day trips etc. when I want the minimum to carry. It has good contrast and images appear sharp. I did some tests recently with all my lenses that covered 70mm (24-85G, 35-70D and 70-210) and discovered an interesting thing; superficially the 24-85G's images looked best however, both the others resolved more detail. The subject was a large ceramic vase from about 1.7m, both the 35-70 and 70-210 revealed the surface cracks in the glaze the 24-85 did not. Lighting and camera body and settings were the same for all shots. Not scientific I know but, as a consequence I use the 35-70 more often and gain any contrast increase required in post. You can always give up detail but you can never put in what you havn't got.

#9 zepirate



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts

Posted 23 November 2009 - 05:47

I use this as a general walk-about lens on the D300.  It has produced some very nice pics, in my opinion.  I've no particular objections on it.  Good value for money I believe. For serious work however, I  normally use the 24-70.

#10 Nikon Bob

Nikon Bob

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts

Posted 19 June 2010 - 20:27

I bought this lens used and just got back from a one month road trip. For taking holiday snaps it fills the bill very well on my D700. Sharpness was never a problem at any aperture I used it at, focus was snappy and accurate and any distortion (it does have distortion) was taken care of in PP in NX2 capture as were any darkened corners. For a lightweight consumer travel lens in this class of lens it is a good one in my book. No regrets getting it.


#11 ozone



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • LocationNorway
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 25 April 2013 - 09:29

Great value lens, that is sharp and contrasty in the center at all focal-lenghts and apertures. The rest of the image is so-so...


I had multiple samples over the years, and sample variation was rampant! Typically one side would be "mushier" than the other.


I recently got myself a 24-70 and don't look back. Suddenly I have zoom that is sharper than all of the primes in the same focal-lenghts! Inspiring!

#12 Dan Brown

Dan Brown

    Advanced Member

  • Subscriber
  • 201 posts
  • LocationFort Worth
  • Edit my pics?:No

Posted 08 November 2013 - 05:37

I gave it three stars, but was leaning toward four. The distortion bothers me, along with softish corners at the wide end.

#13 borden1812


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts
  • LocationCanada
  • Edit my pics?:No

Posted 08 December 2013 - 23:14

I like it's range and convenience as a walk-around lens.  It has ED glass and AF-s. For my applications, image quality is quite accepatable.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

The above adverts really do help Fotozones. Please click on them if they are relevant to you. Not seeing them? Just exclude Fotozones from your ad blocker. Thanks!

An appeal to all Fotozones visitors: please help me to keep this site going by starting your gear purchases using any one of the affiliate links shown below:

Amazon.com | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Adorama.com | thinkTank Photo | DigitalRev.com | OWC | B&H or Donate via PayPal

Starting your shopping here doesn't cost you anything more, but by using the links above (or any others found on the site) you are advising the affiliate that you support this website. This results in a small commission that helps with the running costs. If your preferred outlet isn't among those listed above you can also support the site by making a donation of any amount via PayPal (no PayPal account required). Any donation will be most appreciated.