Nikon Z 24-200mm VS Z 24-70mm F4S. Picture Quilty, Focus breathing, Focus speed.

Hey Everyone !
In this video we will take a look at the Nikon Z 24-200mm Lens.
We will be comparing it directly to the Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 S
if you are only interested in certain focal lengths here are the timings for the Video
24mm 1:48
35mm 10:50
50mm 17:05
70mm 20:00
Summery 23:11
AF Test 25:55
Focus Breathing 27:34
There will be a
24-200mm VS 24-120mm F4
24-200mm VS 28-300mm
Video very soon.
If you are interested in my photography then follow me on instagram: / nikonricci
Hope you found this video useful. If you have any questions let me know in the comments.
Thanks for watching !
#Nikon #NikonZ #Nikkor

[@RicciTalks]

Hey Everyone ! Hope you find this video Useful I was surprised by how well the 24-200mm performed. Iv got some other videos about this lens on the way against the 24-120 and the 28-300. Also I'm going to do a VR test against the 24-70 to see what difference there is between 24-70 with IBIS and the 24-200 with IBIS + optical VR. As always Thanks for watching !

[@ashokkandimalla5962]

I look at this lens as the smallest and the lightest 200mm available for the Z cameras today.

[@BoostLeekdMedia]

Thanks for the awesome review! It's a super tough choice for me since I'm planning on capturing more automotive footage with the Z6. the 24-200 looks insanely good! Now, I don't know which one to keep. lol

[@giannidelbianco3526]

Ricci Talks thank you, it was really helpfull !

[@infokanaal]

Great video! Not sure where to put requests. It would be good to compare Z6 +Tc1.4+Z70-200@200mm vs. Z7+Z70-200 @200mm+ (1.4 cropped down to get similar 24MP) so Z6@280mm vs z7@280mm

[@stevelink3]

Nice comparison Ricci, but given that the 24-70 f/4 is an “S” class lens, I would have liked to have seen a somewhat bigger difference in center sharpness at f/8. Thanks again!

[@raymondpan5961]

waiting for this lens review for 3 months since your first post, detailed review, the BEST!

[@robertthomas9043]

Appreciate your diligence and effort to accurately portray the lenses as they are. Nice job!

[@quiver99]

Thank you Ricci! That’s the review I was waiting for

[@komanguy]

I hesitated between both lenses and finally chose the 24-200m after watching your comparison. thanks for the hard work.

[@stanw4317]

Excellent production! I very much appreciate your style with just the right pace. Thank you very much for doing these. I will be ordering the Z24-200 for my Z7. Seems to be a great travel walk around lens (when safer travel resumes).

[@stevenstoller9547]

Thanks for the review. I have on order the 24-200. I use the AF-S Nikkor 28-300 3.5-5.6 lens on my D850 all the time works like a charm for casual vacation shots. That's why I ordered the 24-200 for my Z6. Now I know I made the right decision. Less weight, less fatigue, more fun.

[@JackBellesPhotography]

Another great review. Nikon have done a really good job in designing these new zoom lenses!

[@BoostLeekdMedia]

Ooof! This is going to be a tough one for me since I do automotive track events and would love to use it as a 'vlogging' lens too. Dang! lol Thanks for the insanely detailed review Ricci!

[@kariossyr6018]

Hard to find this level of comparisons at all! Huge effort while keeping so precise. I agree on the conclusion, only slightly preferred the colors and the exposure of 24-70 at wider focal ranges. Keep it up, good job really.

[@ericvaughan11]

Great review as always, can’t wait to get mine. Have one pre-ordered hopefully I will get it soon

[@thekingofhearts8687]

Thanks for the great comparison!! Eagerly waiting to get this lens.

[@johnmiller5717]

As always, the big boys are once again trying to catch up with Olympus. Nice lens, one my friend should enjoy on his second camera while birding. Well done.

[@joserios1869]

Best Nikon reviews!! Great job Ricci!!

[@d.5497]

This video changed my mind and I'm getting the 24-70mm f4. I am the type of person to pay attention to details, and since the 105 micro for close up photos is going to be coming out any day now. I'll stick with this combo. Incredible video! Thank you for this!

[@stanobert3475]

I ordered the 24-200 three months ago. I am eager to use this on my Z7 and use the crop mode for more reach if needed as a travel kit. The 24-70 lens produces stellar landscape photos!

[@samimina3504]

Ricci, the biggest differences I see between these two lenses is that the 24-200 has: 1) less contrast and thus appears a tad less sharp, and 2) a more neutral and cooler grey, versus the warmer and a bit reddish grey of the 24-70 lens.

[@seantomlinson3320]

I just got back from a trip and I kept thinking this lens would be perfect for my Z6. This review really convinced me. Time to rebuild the budget to buy it.

[@chrisguli2865]

Thanks for these pretty comprehensive tests Ricci! These two excellent lenses are ever so close and make tough choices for many photographers. I have the 24-70 f/4 on my Z6ii and was thinking about getting the 24-200, but thinking the quality of the 24-200 would not be as good I went with the former - wow this is a surprise. The f/4 constant aperture is a definite advantage, but the extra reach of the 200 is a definite plus too. In many cases the difference is like splitting the split of a split of a hair.

[@scotimages]

Many Thanks. The 24-200 is a no brainer for travel use. Had not expected this result at all

[@philgreen3376]

waiting for mine to arrive, hopefully next week.

[@euthman]

Thanks! No pressure, but I just pre-ordered the 24-200 mm based solely on your review. :)

[@RicciTalks]

Haha ! I hope you like it!

[@sramabadran]

I ordered when it was announced. I'm still waiting to receive my lens. There seems to be a massive backlog in Europe at least. Hopefully will get it early Sept, based on what the dealer says.

[@euthman]

@@sramabadran Also in US. Backordered at B&H Photo and Adorama

[@sramabadran]

Got mine a couple of days ago. Looking forward to being able to test it this weekend.

[@pabloyanez2235]

Another great review. It was interesting to see that the DOF at 70mm f6.3 seemed to significantly different between the two lenses. The lens in the background seems to be significantly sharper with the 24-70mm.

[@meckymesser9609]

I also just tried the lens in my local camera store - a great lens

[@ruinsaneornot]

Very good, thorough review. Thank you! Now I own Z 24-200mm on my Z6, can't be happier with the quality of this lens! I'm especially surprised with the great sharpness.

[@GoskiSlovakia]

Hey, have you tried to take picture with this lens early morning somewhere agains the sun? I am interested in sunstars at 24 mm. If it´s acceptable compared to 24-70 S quality . I still can not decide between 24-70 and 24-200 mm lens :-)). I am afraid about sunstars and focus speed when taking movie

[@BrianKushner]

Just received this lens. So far I'm very impressed with it.

[@gv4521]

very very helpful video. I am looking forward to a comparison with the 70200 lens.

[@renzoagostini343]

Grande recensione, bravo, ho già il 24 70 f4, sono in attesa del 70 200, ma sicuramente prenderò anche questo ottimo 24-200, un caro saluto dall'Italia.

[@adamturner7040]

Thanks for doing these Ricci a lot of effort put into these videos appreciated mate. Don't suppose you have any insider knowledge on when we are finally able to get our hands on the Z 70-200 2.8?

[@sasakiken1223]

Thank you for the great video. I heard the 24-200mm is on sale in USA. I have been waiting for it for 4 months in Japan.

[@craigcarlson4022]

Huh, agree with you...i never thought it would be so similar. Thanks for the test.

[@markstemmett5296]

Thank you for this very well done, would be nice to also see what the 24-70 would do at F4 each time

[@berndmevers]

Very useful review, thanks a lot!

[@DaleEverett]

Great comparison. You always do right.

[@LondonViewpoints]

Looks like a decent lens that 24-200, really surprisingly good results compared to the 24-70 👍🏻

[@RicciTalks]

Hey ! Hope your doing well ! I agree it’s a really nice lens

[@scottweaverphotovideo]

Thanks. Very important info. I couldn't discern the subtle superiority of the 24-70. I saw a tad of purple fringing with both in the corners.

[@johnhjic2]

What an interesting lens. I know I am starting to think of a Z mount camera but still waiting for the 105mm macro that I see on the list.. but look good.

[@LockeLeon]

I was waiting for this

[@BermyBwoy]

Great information as always but lets talk about the fact your collection is 100% enviable. Just flexing the D6, 500mm PF and Noct doing a test of a $900 lens lol :D That aside, this lens and the 20mm is really all I want right now.

[@alwaysforwardyt]

Very useful indeed. Thanks!

[@simondiamond4380]

This review helped me make my decision on these two impressive lenses. I went for the 24-70 f4 as most of the photos I take is in lower light and the constant apature comes into its own to keep ISO as low as possible (the IBIS also helps). Means I only need to carry my 35mm f1.8 for night time photography. I am curious on the 24-105 S lens on the road map, particularly if the lower zoom range is f2.8

[@bitdancer1005]

Well done!

[@MBSKanal]

Very thorough and honest review. Thanks.

[@RicciTalks]

Thanks a lot for watching!

[@gennadymeergus7172]

Thank you for a good show. Even when you see limitations of the lens, you know how strong they are and when they (almost) disappear. Very useful, thank you

[@stephanieowens7358]

Awesome, thank you! The 24 - 200 performed really well for an all-in-one lens! I'm curious, have you compared them when handholding at low shutter speeds? (such as 1/20th or 1/50th of a second)

[@jpdj2715]

4:34 the difference you reference I would call "contour sharpness" and is about the ability to depict a contrasty contour sharp without blurring the edge.

[@HR-wd6cw]

I think I may have commented before on this but now that I've owned the 24-200 for about 8 months now, I can say that it's a little less sharp than the 24-70 f/4 but it's better than the older F-mount 28-300. Obviously lenses in this category (travel zooms or travel super zooms) tend to comrpromise sharpness for weight and size and convenience. So that needs to be weighed out. I'd say if you can, have both but if you can't, the 24-200 is still a great travel lens. Just know that it's not quite as sharp but you're gaining one lens that can potentially replace 2 lenses and for travel photography (in my experience at least) convenience and not having to worry about gear or what lens is on your camera is important, because it can mean getting a shot versus missing it (if you're switching lenses). For me, I was willing to sacrifice the sharpness for convenience--I don't think much about what lens is on my camera when I travel now (obviously landscape or more specific tasks, I'll use the appropriate lenses--like a 24-70 or 14-30, or 70-200, but as a walkaround travel lens, the 24-200 works great) but for things where having razor sharp images isn't super critical, I use the 24-200. It offers enough sharpness that for most people, it's decently sharp.

[@antonoat]

Very interesting review yet again Ricci, it's a great little performer the 24-200 and so convenient as a one lens solution. Still waiting with much anticipation to see your review of the new 70-200f2.8! Cheers buddy, stay safe. PS your lens review format is excellent, would be really cool if you could include something like a feather for that ultra fine detail! Don't want much do I , lol.

[@RicciTalks]

I’m always open to new suggestions! I could definitely look at some cotton thread or a feather to add in I think it would be really useful for some of the high end lenses coming up

[@antonoat]

@@RicciTalks Appreciate your rapid response Ricci, that would be great if you could include something organic with very fine detail. would love to see you test some of the longer primes too, with Nikon we are really spoilt for choice.

[@patrick.771]

You were faster than all the other reviewers :) I hope Nikon releases also a 24-105 in the near future... and a 70-200 F4. Would make the Z system more competitive. Wouldn't the 24-200 be even better on a Z6? Corner sharpnes should be better on cameras with less MP, shouldn't it?

[@akoskiss7320]

Great comparison! For landscape use, the 24-70/4 still wins for me, because of the focus breathing (focus stacking) and sealing. For travel use, it's going to do well. Another obvious choice of comparison would be the new Tamron 28-200mm FE (adapted).

[@zhaiminwei250]

两个都是防尘防水的，你肯定搞错了什么，我也是2470f4的用户

[@mengchen9540]

thank you ricci, this vid is very helpful:)

[@RicciTalks]

Thanks for watching

[@stevetqp9152]

NIce work as always, Ricci! However, as a landscape and product photographer obsessive about image sharpness and detail, especially when printing large, when I manage to acquire the Z7, in my research on the Nikkor S lens roadmap, I was even a bit skeptical of the IQ of the 24-70 f/4 vs. that of the 24-70 f/2.8. Your excellent test comparison of those two actually convinced me that the f/4 version is a worthwhile alternative to the /2.8, at least in terms of image sharpness at f/8. So, despite how "close" the 24-70 f/4 is to the 24-200 in this test, I would still never consider an "all-in-one" zoom for the work I do, given the large poster prints I create. I still feel as though I wouldn't be "maximizing" the awesome output potential of the Z7 using the 24-200. IMHO, that lens is more suited for the Z6, and/or someone who doesn't print large, or is as "picky" about image detail in large prints as I am. That said, I am still considering the 14-30 f/4 as a zoom that IS capable of the use case for which I would need. Thanks again!

[@RicciTalks]

Makes complete sense if I knew an image I was shooting was going to be printed large I wold opt for the sharpest lens I could use. I have seen some incredibly large prints from the 14-30 and 24-70 f4. We have a landscape print measuring about 5m x 4m taken on the 24-70 f4 (Z7 ) and it looks fantastic but like you say not every one is as picky or needs to print large so will never see the difference

[@stanlituchy2206]

1

[@mluu83]

Thanks for the video. Any chance you could compare it to the AF-P 70-300 FX lens?

[@sacberr]

Great review as always! How would you compare the build quality between the two lenses? I guess the housing of the 24-200 is all plastic, so it should be less sturdy than the 24-70, but I am wondering if it feels noticeable? Cheers and keep up the great contend!

[@chmaowang1829]

Hope to see the comparison between this lenses and the new Tamron 28-200.

[@MikeJamesMedia]

As I've always said, I love your reviewing style... Not unproven opinions or "feel", but images we can clearly judge. Like you, i was surprised by the performance of the 24-200, and am quite pleased to see Nikon doing such a great job with the Z lenses. I was slow to adopt the Z cameras, (Z6, in my case) but once I had it in my hands, set it up for my needs, and have shot with it a lot, (about 8000 images in the 6 weeks I've had it, along with a bit of video) I'm completely sold. I still use my D810, when I want higher-res images, but wow... The Z6 has definitely spoiled me. Thanks again for the great work you're doing, to keep us informed. And... Your photography is outstanding. (I follow you on Instagram, etc..) This is my favorite, and most-trusted Nikon-related channel.

[@RicciTalks]

Thanks so much it means a lot ! And keeps me going after hours of editing 🤣.

[@MikeJamesMedia]

@@RicciTalks I know it's a LOT more work for you than the relatively-small amount we see here on KZbin. Thanks again for all the effort!

[@christroy8047]

Ricci, you really do a fantastic job! Thank you for your intelligent and very informative reviews. 5 out of 4 stars. Cheers /Chris.

[@stefpix]

Great roundup. I am happy with the 24-200, but I ordered a second hand like new 24-70 at half price. The 24-70 can focus much closer, which sometimes I need to for restaurant reviews assignments when I need to photograph dishes. Also more than one stop at 70 and 50 mm make a difference indoors, even if it is not dark interiors. For landscape, nature, daylight the 24-200 is surprisingly good but it has its limitations. I see it more as a substitute of a 70-200 f4, I will not buy that. Also I feel the 24-70 has nicer bokeh, when I compared the 2 lenses at a local store. I would have been curious of a comparison of both wide open at 70mm even if at different apertures

[@cditfurth]

Great review. Thank you!

[@RicciTalks]

Glad you found it useful! Thanks for watching

[@bram2320]

Very nice and complete video, still relevant today; But one piece of information that I didn't find - relevant for autofocus: what camera body was used here? I see a top screen so I assume Z6 or higher? Currently deciding between Z5 and Z6ii.

[@robkiefer822]

Thanks, really great review - always love watching your videos. It would be great to see, how the lenses compare at the real FX corners (where you showed the vignetting). I would assume that is the area where you would see the most drop of sharpness. At the DX corner equivalent (more or less where you check your corner performance) the differences are really not much. But this might change at the FX corner.

[@LordWilsonVILLA]

A good detailed video, thanks!

[@RicciTalks]

Thanks for watching!

[@adolfousiermarketstars6765]

awesome 👏🏻

[@lewinalejandroespinal6770]

Waooo Thank you So much for this video

[@terrywbreedlove]

The Z6 and the 24-200 would be a smashing good combination.

[@TangerineTux]

4:00 Could this be in part field curvature? On the 24-200, the dirt spots (?) on the wall look quite a bit blurrier too.

[@yervantparnagian5999]

Very good test of the two. Even stopped down to F8 the 24-200 still maintains the purple fringing. I was surprised to see that it never goes away. Guess that's the difference between an S lens and not. What's your finding along the full spectrum of FL on the 24-200?

[@thomsn5670]

Although you say that the color reproduction is without difference, I would say the 24-200 shows yellows with more green in them. You can see that in the yellow color checker patch as well as in the golden writing on the 500mm PF in the background. It would be interesting if this might only be because of not-yet-final profiles in software or if this will persist.

[@j-day]

Recently I had really been considering trading in the 24-70F4 for the 24-200. I recently sold my ancient Sigma 70-2002.8 APO, in favour of moving to something that performs better on the Z system. However, looking at the roadmap the 24-105 (which is rumored to be vario 2.8-4), and the 100-400 S should be released soon. Both very exciting, and highly anticipated lenses. I will probably wait for these instead for the increased focal range and the more than likely superior aperture's these lenses will have. I don't mind carrying two tele's. For travel though? The 24-200 probably can't be beat for convenience.

[@Andy-rk9mu]

question: the vid suggests in top right corner e.g. 6:00 that 24-200mmS - I think it is a mistake. And as always a great review!

[@markusbolliger1527]

The Z 24-70mm S has better micro-contrast, you can see this in every image! Also the colors are a little bit cleaner. Togeter this results in more brillant pictures.

[@ozzycosco3716]

Nice Quilty

[@SeanOMoore]

Great video, thanks for the detail. All we need now is for Nikon to start shipping it...

[@RicciTalks]

They shipped today to retailers! Those that preordered have started to get notifications

[@SeanOMoore]

@@RicciTalks Cool, am in the UK, will keep my eye out. I pre-ordered so hopefully hear something soon.

[@sweetdavey]

That's some seriously impressive performance. I'd see no reason whatsoever to get the 24-70 f4 over the 24-200. That slight corner improvement really won't matter. Unless one needs a bright 2.8 zoom this seems like a no brainer. I'll definitely get the lens if I go Z mount.

[@bb91a07]

Great video :) Is the 24-200mm lens also weather sealed (as the other S line Z lenses), so you could use them in the rain for example?

[@RicciTalks]

The lens is sealed yes

[@peterlooper7956]

Fantastic Ricci, please compare it to the F mount 70-200mm f/4 now. Thanks.

[@RicciTalks]

I will do this I’m struggling to get hold of the 70-200mm f4 I will have one by the end of the month so should be uploaded shortly after that !

[@Funnhypoiuyt2345]

@@RicciTalks Good job!! I'd be very curious to see how this 24-200 Z performs at equal focal lengths with the AF-P 70-300 FX.

[@photosmusic7177]

@@RicciTalks Please compare the 24-200mm f/4-6.3 with the Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G and the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E at their common focal length. Thank you!

[@lawrose4]

Can you comment on to what degree, if any, the Z 7-7 II with its higher megapixel count affects this test and also the one you did comparing the 24-200 to the 28-300? I mean, will the difference in sharpness be as apparent on the Z 6-6II or the Z 5-50? How about CA/purple fringing? Thanks for these reviews!

[@skyrunr]

I'm not getting this lens for landscapes. I'm getting it because it is that much more useful than the 50-250mm on a Z50! With this lens I don't have to switch back to the 16-50mm nearly as often. I'm not a fan of the unprotected sensor when changing mirrorless Z lenses! Plus I can use it on the Z6's replacement when it comes out. I'd be VERY curious to see the 16-50mm @ 24mm as a landscape comparison. There were some times where the background was much better in the 24-70mm (17:41,) some distortion was noticeable at the edge, but I'd expect that from an 8X zoom. The cost only seems high UNTIL you said "It is not as bad as we've seen on some f-mount lenses!" SOLD! Even though I'll more than likely replace it with the 24-105mm when it is released IF it isn't a lot more expensive.

[@ericerickson6537]

I just bought the lens for my z6 and looking forward to using it. I shoot at f8 most of the time. Good review, may sell my f4 24-70 now.

[@skyrunr]

Did you get it, how did it work out?

[@skyrunr]

@photodog28 Wow, that really says something, thank you!

[@tallaganda83]

Canon are soon to release the eos r5, and a boatload of lenses including a macro and 70-200f4 two lenses I really want for the Z mount. Nikon better start getting their wiggle on with lenses.

[@saibhargavamanda1062]

Hi Ricci when can we see u comparing a Z 24-105 f4 ? When is Nikon planning to release that? Along with a next new FF Z camera launch?

[@DK-ys2cw]

All I want is a 24-200 f/2 at the same size and price as a 24-70 f/4. 😀 Seriously though it’s a tough trade off between zoom range and the rapid reduction in aperture. Especially for video use. (Although no professional video)

[@lesliebartsch2578]

thank you for this video, it's so helpful!! is the purple fringing in the 24-200mm shots correctable in lightroom?

[@RicciTalks]

Certainly

[@skyrunr]

How about a 50-250mm versus 24-200mm comparison? I'll bet a lot of users are considering upgrading at the 24-200mm becomes more available. It is interesting to me that most of the Z lenses (even primes) are about the same size as well as several having 67mm filter rings.

[@Funnhypoiuyt2345]

Great job Ricci and thanks for your tests! I would also be brave in the comparison how the AF-P 70-300 FX performs on focal lengths equivalent to 70 to 200 mm. I use this optics with satisfaction on Z6.

[@vitusbering6453]

I had the same question then tested both. AF-P 70-300 beats Z24-300 at any length. But it can be sacrificed for travel weight.

[@javedsumra5918]

Based on your review I bought 24-200mm. The longer range helps me in my general photography. I use prime for specific needs. Thanks.

[@TheGecko213]

Exactly my thoughts

[@ciba20]

great thanks!

[@elihuang577]

very impressive

[@Ritalie]

5:48. The circuit board on the right looks more like a Canon 70D or EOS-R, and is softer. It's actually just a hair less sharp than the 24-70mm in that specific photo, but for most photos, it's probably not noticeable at all?

[@drdehaan]

Z 24-200 S? It’s not an S lens... Thanks for this comparison. I have both and agree on your findings.

[@lupagonzales]

This comparison is a very good job. It is possible to download these photos somewhere?

[@komanguy]

There’s always purple chromatic aberration on the 24-200, but it’s manageable.

[@AD-kr4jn]

Please do compare the latest sigma 100-400contemporary with z 24-200,when it is available. Thanks

[@GoskiSlovakia]

Hey Ricci.I have an question. If I use this lens with Z6 II for example for taking picture of biking or skiing friends in day light at 24 mm, would be autofocus similar to 24-70 S lens? I read this lens is slow, but I think th should be in low light conditions or in 200 mm in my opinion. Am I right? What dou you think?

[@adamwhittingham86]

Sooooo Ricci.....are you secretly testing the z24-105? I'm waiting on that lens. In your next video blink twice slowly then wink once to confirm 🤣

[@HR-wd6cw]

One thing I would add to my comment from a year ago is that while the 24-200 is about 1.3 stops slower at 70mm (maybe a little less like 1 stop slower, can't remember) it still does offer good image quality in the shared focal range with the 24-70 f/4. So if there is a possibility you may shoot beyond 70mm I would get a 24-200. Yes it starts to lose sharpness around 135mm especially in the corners so it's not the best option beyond 135mm (and this is where an AFP 70-300 or a 70-200 will pick up the slack) but at the same time, the images beyond 135mm aren't horrible and are still usable -- it's just your corners may not be as sharp, BUT I'd rather have slightly soft corners at 135mm+ than not be able to shoot at that focal length (or longer) because I'm maxed out at 70mm (on a 24-70). So while it's not ideal for everything and starts to exhibit image quality degredation in the corners beyond 135mm, it does give you the flexibility of one lens that can shoot a wide range of focal lengths and offers decent image quality. It is, after all, a travel zoom, and most travel zooms are a compromise of versatility and convenience at the cost of optical performance. This lens certainly beats out the older F-mount equivalent of the 28-300 and frankly, I'm glad they went with a 24-200 range versus a 28-300 because an extra 4mm on the wide end is a decent amount, versus another 100mm on the long end (and on the Z7 and Z9 cameras, you an use crop mode to get an equivalent 300mm, although at a reduced resolution).

[@avnerbenzvi8757]

thanks a lot, I'm waiting for the Z 24-200 to cane on market (ant clue ??)

[@JohnMayfield-NS]

Well.. I wasn't going to get this lens until you made this vid... :D

[@RicciTalks]

Sorry 🙈😂

[@RobertMolan]

actually in comparisons that you said there was no or little difference I was looking at the text on the lens behind the colour card. The 24-200 seemed sharper. It may suggest one was slightly forward focused. Very little difference indeed.

[@joespag26]

Deal Breaker is the Constant f4 vs variable f4-6.3 !! I love f4 across the whole range !

[@PASquared]

I too prefer a constant f/4 and would choose the 24-70 f/4 between the two...but a 24-200 f/4 would be just about impossible in terms of size and cost