A little short of the mark

The Nikkor 12-24mm F/4 ED-IF DX G lens is Nikon's offering for an ultrawide zoom for its digital backs. Any 35mm Nikon user transitioning to digital will certainly need to give this lens serious thought if they wish to continue with wide angle work. Unfortunately the lens falls very short of what I feel most users would expect, especially considering the $1000+ street price and how it compares to other top-of-the-line offering from Nikon. The only consolation lies in that none of the third party manufacturers have anything even near as good.


Basics: (from the Nikon website)

Focal Length: 12-24mm
Maximum Aperture: f/4
Picture Angle (Nikon Digital SLR): 99-61 degrees
Lens Construction: 11 elements in 7 groups
Lens Drive: Silent Wave Motor
Extra Low Dispersion (ED) Lens: 2 Elements
Aspherical Lens: 3 Elements
Focusing: Internal Focusing (IF) Type
Minimum Shooting Distance: 11.8 in
Maximum Reproduction Ratio: 1:8.3
Minimum F Stop: 22
Aperture Blades: 7 blades (rounded)
Aperture Ring: NA
Lens Hood: HB-23 (Supplied)
Filter Size: 77mm
Case: Soft case CL-S2 (Optional)
Dimensions (Diameter x Length: Approx. 3.2 in x 3.5 in
Weight: 1.07 lbs
Included Accessories: HB-23 Hood, 77mm lens cap, rear cap


On paper the lens seems like a nice mid-priced offering. The specs show attention to detail in the optical performance areas but also many manufacturing compromises that might be a problem for some users...more on that later.

Construction: I have an 18-70mm F3.5-4.5 lens that came with my D70. It's a cheap general purpose $300 walk-around lens with excellent optical performance but middle-road construction. If I handed you the 18-70 and the 12-24 and blindfolded you, I bet you couldn't tell which one cost $1000 street and which one came as a kit lens. The 12-24 is made of a disturbing amount of plastic. It might be compact, but that compact size comes at the expense of a small maximum aperture (F/4) resulting in a dim viewfinder. I see no evidence of any real attempt at weatherproofing this lens and I see no claims to that effect on Nikon's website. This is unusual for a lens in this price range, but apparently not unusual in the latest DX offerings from Nikon.

If you have ever handled a 28-70 AF-S ED-IF F/2.8 or an 80-200 AF-S ED-IF...these lenses seem to be hewn from solid steel. They have large rubberized metal focus and zoom rings and weatherprotection. The latest DX offerings from Nikon show none of this attention to rugged contruction yet still maintain a high street price. If this was a $500 lens I would not complain, but we are talking about a $1000 lens and I would not have minded spending an extra $100 to get the better construction if that's what it took to do the job right.

Operation: I might forgive a $300 lens for having a cheap feel and sloppy ring movement, but I have a hard time forgiving a $1000 lens of the same flaws. The lens is an AF-S lens....this is important because this means it was meant to allow the user to quickly adjust focus manually without worrying about damaging the autofocus mechanism of the camera. GREAT!!! I LOVE IT!!! It should be on all lenses..and I EXPECT IT from a lens in this price range. But then they mount a tiny focus ring in the BACK of the lens where it is difficult to use. I am constantly forgetting that the damn rings are reversed on this lens. Every time I hand the camera over to a friend I see the same frustration from them as they fumble with the reversed rings. When you are used to a large manual focus ring on a fine lens like a 28-70 AF-S ED-IF F/2.8 or an 80-200 AF-S ED-IF F/2.8 you realize what you are missing with the 12-24 F/4.

Optical Performance: I have very few quibbles with the optical performance of this lens. The key characteristic everyone will care about is edge distortion. I find that edge distortion is minimal and about what one would expect considering it's a 12-24mm lens. I have never used another lens in the focal length range that showed less distortion. Color aberrations are nonexistent, sharpness is excellent. The rounded diaphragms do indeed provide for a nice pleasing bokeh, but the F/4 maximum aperture and the fact that it's a 12mm lens ( which has gobs of DOF in the first place) makes it very hard to achieve an out of focus effect on anything but very deep subjects. This is no flaw of the lens design, it is simple physics.

The F/4 aperture is a BIG disappointment. The other lenses in my stable are mostly F/2.8 and it's quite obvious in he viewfinder that you are working with one less stop of light. The viewfinder is dim and fairly lifeless with this lens attached. I would much rather have a larger and more expensive lens with an F/2.8 aperture than a compact one with an F/4 aperture. Most pro level optics are F/2.8 except for long telephotos.

Other issues: The wide-angle lens hood is as well made as anything else I have used. It is small ( by necessity) but luckily the lens is fairly immune to flaring anyway so it's just fine.

The 77mm filter size is nice and I expect this filter size in this price range. BUT be aware you will need to buy a wide-angle polarizer if you want to use it on this lens. Even some normal filters will vignette if they are too thick. This is common for ultra wide angles...and is not a flaw in lens design.

Internal focusing is to be expected on a lens in this price range. This is not the fastest focusing lens you will have in your stable, but its adequate for the task. Its not quite as "zippy" as I'm used to from an IF lens


What I like about the Nikkor 12-24mm AF-S DX ED-IF F/4 G lens:

1. Cheaper in price than other top-shelf offerings from Nikon. Most top-shelf lenses run in the $1200-$1500 range
2. 77mm filters
3. lens hood included
4. compact size
5. minor edge distortion is better than most lenses in this focal length
6. excellent color, sharpness
7. excellent flare resistance

What I don't like about the Nikkor 12-24mm AF-S DX ED-IF F/4 G lens:

1. F/4 maximum aperture
2. construction quality is way below expectations
3. REVERSED focus and zoom rings
4. TINY focus ring
5. both rings lack a precision feel when using them
6. no attempt to weatherproof the lens

The bottom line:

Back in the early 1980's there was a really AWESOME lens that Nikon made... a 25-50mm F/4 AIS. Wow, what an amazing lens optically. It was a complete commercial failure. WHY? time an time again the general public balked at the F/4 aperture. When you are used to F/1.8 on a prime lens, giving up 2 stops of light for the sake of a zoom seems pretty silly. I find it odd that 25 years later people seem to be more than willing to accept products that would have been considered substandard 25 years ago. How come, just because its a DX lens, do I have to use an F/4 aperture zoom? why does it have to be poorly constructed ( compared to the CURRENT line of D series lenses designed for the 35mm format). Why do I have to settle for less functionality(substandard and poorly located focus rings) just because its designed for an APS sensor and not 35mm? And why do I still have to pay the same price? And people wonder why film guys resist the urge to migrate to digital. Its not because we dont want digital capture, its because the equipment just isnt anywhere near as well "thought out" as the stuff they were using before.

If you want an ultrawide zoom in your stable, then this is really your only choice. Nikon simply does not offer anything in this focal length that is better. They also do not offer a 35mm format lens that is anywhere near this wide ( short of a prime lens or a fish-eye). Also, other
manufacturer's lenses in the same focal length are worse. I feel strongly that the lens is an excellent optical performer and will certainly allow you to deliver professional quality results. I also feel strongly that the F/4 aperture, low construction quality and reversed rings make for a lens that is less than a joy to use. If there were a better lens out there I would buy it because I'm not in love with this one.

I do however give the lens 4 stars....but I might need to explain. OPTICALLY the lens is awesome and among other lenses from other manufacturers this lens does stand out as the better lens. The shortcomings of this lens lie in construction, ergonomics and cost cutting ( F/4). I would not be so harsh on this lens if it was $500 or $600. But when you raise the lens to the same price point as TOP-SHELF offerings in other focal lengths....I EXPECT a similar product.

If you grew up in the digital age and have never owned anyting other than a digital SLR..then you will love it, mostly because you never had the privelege of using the good stuff, so you dont know what you're missing. No insult intended....just a sad commentary on the current mindset that surrounds digital SLR production and marketting.

This review might anger a few readers, but I call them like I see them. From an OPTICAL standpoint the lens is superb, but from a construction and ergonomic standpoint the lens compares very poorly to other lenses in the same price range. It suffers from many compromises and to be honest I tolerate the lens only because one really has no other choice in the Nikon zoom lens stable.

-----------------------------------------------

update 9/1/07

Now with the reintroduction of FULL FRAME in to the Nikon vocabulary it becomes painfully obvious that this "pro" lens will forever be relegated to the second tier behind the much more competant glass designed for the FX camera backs. Not only does the "pro" glass in that category actually perform to expectations, but is solidly constructed and competitively priced ( within its performance category). DX will merely be a footnote in Nikon's past and all of us who were duped into believing that Nikon was dedicated to the DX sensor size should remember this. Thank God I still have all my old lenses. I kept them because they performed flawlesslly despite their size....Im glad I kept them because now they will have new life on the FX mount.

the new 14-24mm F/2.8 FULL FRAME AF-S lens for the FX sensor is EXACTLY what the 12-24mm F/4 needed to be. For all of you who emailed me with negative comments regarding my review of this lens....I TOLD YOU SO! The 12-24mm is an overpriced cheap plastic immitation of the "REAL" thing. I regret having bought one.. I wish I had done what my friends told me and tossed all my Nikon gear and switched to Canon. NOT because of any performance advantage but because Nikon put out this DX size....got us all to buy new gear and lenses ....and then reintroduced the old stuff as better. Im so glad I kept my old glass.

Film used to be so much simpler......