Nikon Z 24-200mm VS Nikon 28-300mm. The All in one Lens test. Picture Quality, Focus breathing test 

Hey ! I hope you find This Video useful ! For me the 28-300 was a good lens at its time but its starting to show its age (2010) as zoom lens quality has improved since its introduction. As always thanks for watching !

I've come to the point that I press "like" before even start watching your videos.

Thank you man, your video brought me one of the best lenses I ever had, keep going with that vids , great work !!!

As always a clear coherent look at the lens. Thank you. I think that what comes through as much as anything is the consistent performance of the 24-200 across the frame and throughout the focal range. It really is starting to remind me a lot of the Olympus 12-100 for a full frame.

Wow. Big difference, thanks for doing this for us. Hitting the pre-order button tonight!

Ricci, thanks for the review and comparison. Right after you review the VR version in your next video, I'm convinced I'll be ordering this lens... Thanks you.

This review will be very helpful, and good news for my wife. She's finding the D810/28-300 a bit heavy and bulky and we were wondering about moving her to the Z6II and the 24-200. Although she will gain significantly more FOV at the wide end, I had been concerned she would lose quite a bit going from 300 to 200mm. However she often takes zoomed-in shots of flowers and butterflies etc, and your work shows that she will be losing almost nothing due to the focus breathing on the older lens. Combined with the sharper edges this is fantastic news. Thank you!

Ricci, your tests are really the only ones on YT that tell us what we need to know about lenses we are considering. The consistent test methods and traits compared are VERY helpful. The 24-200 we could assume was pretty good just from the lenses in Z mount that came before. Unfortunately, my large collection of F mount lenses are a lot less satisfying now that I have a number of S lenses. Even my long time favorites, like the 85 1.4g just do not get used anymore. I can see the difference between the 85 G and S and grab the S lens every time. My 70-200 VR 2,8 that not that long ago was my favorite portrait lens really shows its weaknesses compared to 85 S at the same FL even when stopped down. I have the 24-70 f/4 and 2.8 and while the 2.8 is stunning I use the f/4 much more often because for the weight and size, it is not much of a compromise, it punches well over its weight. My wedding, engagement and event/performance bookings all disappeared since formal weddings are still not permitted after 4 months of lock down so about the only shooting I am doing is personal, landscapes and 18th and 19th-century architecture while I wait out the lifting or restrictions. So I do not feel the pressure to get the 70-200 2.8 S as much as I did last winter in prep for the new season. My businesses here are incoming tourism, photography and a shop for repairing professional audio equipment and all are shut down for the season, a year to year and a half with no income can be weathers pretty well simply because the cost of living here is about 1/10th of what it was back home in the US.

Thank you very much for the very detailed videos! They helped me a lot in order to take a good decision what to buy! Greetings from Chile! Look how far your videos reach!

Great video Ricci. I had the 28-300 and loved the versatility but with my D800 back in the day it just wasn't sharp enough. I had to trade it in the end for a 24-70 f2.8 Great to see the benfefits of the Z-mount though. Hope you're well, Adrian

Great test and comparison, Ricci. Thank you very much! I'm quite sure I will get a Z24-200 as an "all road" lens.. By the way I've got the 28-300 since it reached the market and I've never realized its "powerfull" Focus Breathing!

Very helpful information. I think it would be very helpful for landscape photographers if you could possibly compare the Z 24-200VR against the Nikon 70-200 f/4 G lens. If it's close to that lens in focus accuracy then we've got a real game changer. Really appreciate your reviews.

Thanks for this interessting comparison. I am very positively surprised at the good optical performance the Z 24-200 delivers. Apparently the days of huge compromises when it comes to sharpness with ultrazooms are finally over. I think it works very well for video too, especially because of the low focus breaking. As always, I'm looking forward to your next video. Thumbs up!

Great Work Ricci as usual. I'd love to see the F 70-300 AF-P vs the Z 24-200 comparison

Excellent comparison, thank you for sharing. I am looking forward to buy my new 24-200!

Ah, that dot matrix printer sound of the 28-300 AF. I know it well. You have convinced me to go for the 24-200 just on the basis of the AF motor. And yes, the focus breathing on the 28-300 is INSANE.

Great video and spelling "qulity" I can really get behind ;-) Seriously, thanks for posting your reviews their super useful.

OMG! Thank you for the review and comparison. I felt like the 28-300 was talking to me during that AF test. Of course, I don't jave a Z, so the 24-200 is not an option for me. But knowing what else is out there is also enlightening.

Thanks for the test. I think I found a mistake in focus calibration or autofocus. At 120mm tests and further to the end of all tests you can clearly see that the numbers on the lens behind the colours are better focused at 28-300.

Z mount continues it's winning streak! Thank you for these practical comparisons.

Great job Ricci and Thanks for sharing

I ordered this lens when it was announced, I hope to get it by mail this week! Thank you for the comparison, now I know I will not be disappointed. Would be nice to have a review of the VR functionality, how does it work out in the field on a Z6 or a Z7. I have a very (very!) old 200mm F4 (from 1972!) and it's not working very good handheld, very shaky. On a tripod it's excellent however but I guess it's superseded by this 24-200 with VR.

Very interesting. I'm not really surprised that the 28-300 was less good but I generally use mine on travels outdoors at f8-f11. I also use the 24-120mm f4 for shootings indoors so I'm interested in the comparison with the 24-200

Thank you, thank you, thank you Ricci for doing this comparison. The Nikon Z 24-200mm might be my new hiking lens. The quiet video was a real eye opener.

Good review I own the 24-200 z lens and used to own the 28-300 which I used to think was a very good lens. Times change looking forward to using the new lens.

Thanks for the video! Coming from Sony, I am new to the Nikon lens lineup. Got the z 24-200 and thinking if the 28-300 is better for me. Your video answered that very clearly!

Excellent video. I don’t follow anyone on RU-vid but this might be an exception. Just got my 24-200 Z mount. Nice lens overall but 6.3 can be a bummer sometimes.

Thanks mate helped me make the decision I have the z6ii and went for the 24-200

Thanks for doing the Nikon Z 24-200mm at 200mm, seems I will be getting the lens soon.

This is actually a very good test? I had to focus very closely and follow what you where showing and I was able to notice the difference quite well, especially corner sharpness and the focus breathing. I was also surprised because of the focus breathing at 200mm there was a difference between the two lenses how close the distance was revealed to be. Good test indeed, thank you.

Very informative, thank you for sharing

Many thanks for this excellent video,

That focus breathing is insane on the 28-300mm.

Excellent Video !!

Hi Ricci, finding your channel has been great since I bought my Z6 last year and use your channel to decide which lenses would work best for my purposes. One note of feedback, if I may, is that in your talking head shots, the volume is too low. Thanks for the reviews and hard work!

Great Information! Would like to see a relative f stop comparison between lenses. For example using the ƒ4 24-70 Z lens 2 stops from wide open compared to the 24-200 Z lens 2 stops from wide open.

Yes, very useful Thank you!

Good comparison as I'm considering one of these, in these tests the 24-200 looks better, but I would have liked to have seen the extra reach the 300 brings, and I'll be using mainly for landscape so the focus breathing wouldn't be a concern if it only really effects focusing on close objects

nice reviews, this series comparing the 24-200 , against the 24-70 f4 S series & the 70-200 f4 Fmount have convinced me to get rid of both and replace with this 24-200..

Very impressive, thanks!

Thank you for the information, very much appreciated. Looking forward to seeing how it compares with Z 70-200 and 24-70 2.8’s before I decide on a purchase.

I guess this is sort of to be expected... the Z is not only newer, but as mentioned in the video a few times (and in my experience) the zoom range on the 28-300, while larger, tends to mean more compromises in terms of sharpness, and considering at their new prices, if someone doesn't have either one, the Z is the clear winner here, unless you need the 200-300mm range, but I think for many, 24-200 should cover most people's needs. Couple the 24-200 with a 14-30 and you have a nice, light weight and fairy compact travel kit. Thank you as this was exactly the comparison I was looking for... something side-by-side between the two as I was tempted to get the 28-300 myself because it's more readily available (and I travel a lot) but I think I can wait a little longer and go with the 24-200.

I wish you had zoomed the 28-300 until the image size matched the 24-200 at 200mm to see what effective zoom the 28-300 was actually delivering.

Great! Thank you!

Very helpful, I've been wondering how quick I want to worry about upgrading away from my 28-300mm to a native lens and if the quality gap is this great I want to make the upgrade ASAP.

Great comparisons

I have the F 28-300mm and going to pick up my Z 24-200mm tomorrow. Thanks for the very informative review. At closest focus for the Z lens @ 200mm, what indicated focal length on the 28-300mm was required to show a similar field of view?

thanks to help me take decisions Z 24-200 for Camera daily bag

I have switched to Z mount and I don't see a 70-200 f4 on the roadmap .can you please compare 70-200 f4 F mount to 24-200 Z .this would be a huge weight saving for me and I would only have to carry a 14-30 and 24-200 which is very attractive .im just concerned about image quality .

Yes great I was just going to purchase 28 to 300mm Nikon second-hand but I do love of the New Z lenses so I'll wait till Nikon brings more Z lenses thanks again cheers Jonathan

Good video, thx!

Thank you, no comparison on sharpness, contrast and quality, will sell my 28-300 and get the 24-200 as a travel lens

The Z 24-200mm is looking good in these specs, and is a good seller in 2023. I may have to get one not long from now. Thanks for the comparison.

The 28-300mm looks like the focusing is off (back focusing). Look at at 10:21 point, numbers on the lens in the background are sharper then the 24-200mm even though they are both at the same f stop. Could that be why the lens doesn't appear as sharp?

Hi & thanks for your great review! I was wondering if maybe it would be more fair to compare these lenses after lens corrections applied on the 28-300, since the new Z-line bake in the corrections in the RAW files themselves. Which is convenient but not a fair comparison. Would love if you could please check that out for me. Thanks!

Great review as always Ricci thank you. Are you planning on doing one in comparing it to the 70-200mm f/4 VR, Since I don’t see a replacement for that lands in the roadmap anytime soon would be nice to see how it compares so I can get rid of mine

I would have liked to see what FOV the 28-300 offered at 300 vs the 24-200 at 200 since the extra 100mm of focal length may help to compensate for some breathing. The question is, even if the 28-300 is not always a true 300, does it still offer more magnification?

Thanks for great video

I just got home from my local camera store. I pre-ordered and it came in today! I can't wait to get out and try it on my Z6!

The 24-200 is ... pretty impressive as an all-in-one. Would you recommend this for APS-C (Z50 or whatever new camera is coming out) or would you just recommend the Z DX telezoom? And have you heard about any more DX news? Great video as always. Objective and well-informed comparisons every single time.

Hi Ricci, you are determined to get me to but my hand in to my pocket and bye a Z camera and some lenses. :) I am thinking....

I rather enjoyed that presentation. If I were in the market for that type of lens, this comparison would definitely influence me.

Love your reviews. I wish you would have put them side by side for a physical size comparison.

Without doubt a scientific comparison on the sharpness of these two lenses. I just bought the 28-300 for my D700 and I am surprised by its sharpness. At 50 mm it is equal to my 50 mm ais lenses, it is sharper than my 100 mm. I also use it on my D200 and then it has a reach of 450mm and great contrast. So I really appreciate having that 300 mm when I need it. It's a relatively compact lens, and well made too just a bargain...

Hi sir ,lots of love from India, I have sigma 150-600mm Contemporary lens which currently I am using with my D500. Is Sigma 150-600 mm Contemporary lens compatible with Nikon Z6 with FTZ adapter??? Please let me know sir. I will be waiting for your reply. Thank you.

Nice comparison, thanks. For focus breathing, I measured the length of the same objects. In order to get the same field of view of the 24-200 at closest focus distance, you would have to put the 28-300 at about 270mm, which almost negates the difference in the rated focal lengths of the lenses. Can you compare the field of view at 200mm focused at infinity? That is the circumstance where any differences in the field of view will matter most to me. To round things out, comparing the field of view when at 28mm and focussed at minimum and maximum distances would also be very useful.

Hi.. I might be interested in the 24 200 but, as i do a lot of long exposures photography, i am concerned about the micro shakes when using long focals.. Did you test it ? Thanks

I was about to buy an f mount zoom lens for my z6, quickly changed my mind...

I'd really like to see a comparison of the 24-200 versus the 50-250mm. Including a 24mm comparison with the 16-50mm. I know which one I'd rather have in my bag, but should someone keep the kit lens if they already have it, or use it to fund getting the 24-200 or 24-105?

Excellent video but, anybody thinking to buy the 28 to 300 would have liked to at least seen the test at 300 MM since many super Zooms tend to get dull at their maximum reach

Hi, Is it a good idea to ditch my kit lenses - AF-P DX 18-55mm 3.5/5.6 VR and AF-P 70-300mm 4.5/6.3 VR ED - for a: FX AF-S 28-300mm 3.5/5.6 VR (offer for $250 USD)? I have a D3400 a 50mm 1.8G and a DX 35mm 1.8G I like taking photos anywhere and I mainly shoot animal (birds, dogs, etc.)

Another win for Z glass

IMO If you have the 28-300 you might want to consider using it. It's not quite as sharp as the 24-200 but it's a 1/3 stop faster on both ends, plus a little longer on the long end. But if you don't, go for the 24-200. While it is a little slower, the extra 4mm on the wide end is useful. But I don't know if you'd gain enough to justify $850 buying the 24-200 if you already have the 28-300. Yes the 24-200 is sharper and it's also smaller and lighter. I love mine, and it's become my new favorite travel lens (actaully replaced my 24-70 f/4 and AFP 70-300 for travel, so now I'm down to just a 14-30 and 24-200 for my travel kit).

Thanku sir video verry good

Got mine 2 days ago. I can say it produces much cleaner/clearer then my 28-300 on my D750. Can't do side by side comparison as I no longer have the D750 and I will now sell the 28-300.

Philosophy of use? Travel walk around lenses? Identical image quality from my perspective on small screens where holiday happy snaps are likely most shared. Which one can be had at the lowest price?

I am using my old 70 - 200 f4 on the ftz adapter with great results.. that lens has always been extremely sharp and remains so on my Z bodies... In crop mode on my Z7 I get a 300 mm field of view and if I add my 1.4 teleconverter I'm up to over 400 m m at 5.6, albeit with a slight hit in image quality... If I use my 1.7 teleconverter, there is a noticeable change in IQ. For my Z50 body I bought a used 70 - 300 4.5-6.3 DX P which is an inexpensive, small light and compact lens and relatively new in design with great image quality but not quite matching the 70-200 F4. I am not seeing the need to buy any Zmount variable focal length/ aperture lenses anytime soon, certainly not for a casual walkabout telephoto.. The only downside to the F4 lens is it's rather large and somewhat heavy on the Z7.

I would love to see a comparison of the 24-200 with the 24-70 f2.8. I know they're very different lenses, but I'm trying to decide between the two. I know the 24-70 is going to be a great lens, but the range of the 24-200 makes it very attractive at 1/3 the price.

Can you compare the Z 24-200 with the I8-200

Nice comparisons, but it leaves a simple question unanswered. If there's a small bird about 20 m away, which lens can capture a better picture? It's fine to compare lenses at the same focal length and aperture, but if I have a faster or longer lens, I'll take advantage of it. For this bird, focus breathing is not an issue, and the longer lens will require less cropping. I'd like to see the best picture the two lenses can capture in a given context, and compare those.

I resisted buying the 28-300 for many, many years. I always felt that the 28-300mm was simply not worth the money, even on the sale price. Too heavy, poor focus breathing, poor VR, poor sharpness at all focal length, and not wide enough. Huge difference between 24mm and 28mm, and that was the dealbreaker. At the long end, it is not a true 300mm either. Its more like a 250mm. Not that it matters, because once you are over 100mm or so, you are much better off in a 100-400mm lens. I got the 24-120mm f4 instead, and never regretted it. I have a Z 24-200mm on pre-order since March, and after seeing this video I am keeping my pre-order. Its not for the 120-200mm range above the 24-120mm f4. Its for the 24-120 portion. I want a more quality lens (all attributes) in that range, and the extra range is just for when something is happening right now and I dont have time to switch to a 100-400mm. Yes, Nikon will eventually release the Z 24-105 f4, and I'm sure the image quality will be even better. But, the additional cost and weight will make it unattractive for most.

Thanks for your test. This is excellent info! I took my D850 with the 28-300 on our vacation to New Mexico last autumn and I could see some softness in the images. Obviously this lens was designed for F mount cameras with lower resolution. The images that I created with my Z7, 24-70 F/4 and the 70-300 FP FX lens with the FTZ adapter on our trip to the Canadian Rockies a few months before were noticeably sharper (sometimes too sharp with some morie). I just picked up my new 24-200 Z at my camera store today and it is nicely balanced with the Z7 compared with the 28-300 with the FTZ adapter. I ordered the 24-200s based on one of your earlier reviews. Thanks!

Can you compare nikon 18-300 and 18-200?

What is field of view difference at max focal lengths-200 vs 300 ??

This comparison is done on Z7 in a higher mega pixel camera. But anyone can tell about the 'sharpness' of 28-300 in Z6? Heard that 28-300 lens shows flaws when it is used with high megapixel cameras but it is fine using with lower megapixel camera. Can anyone please comment on it?

nice channel📸

Did I miss the comparison @ 200mm & 300mm, both at maximum tele? Just to see the difference and the impact of the focus breathing. Shame.

Could you comment on the VR quality between Z24-200 vs. F28-300 e.g. on a Z6. I had a quick go at the shop and my simulated shake was much better controlled with the F28-300 and I though I would end up with more rejects with the Z24-200 and did not make the purchase that day. Was I right or wrong about the VR?

This was a layup for the Z lens. The 28-300 was already a flawed lens by F-Mount standards. Thanks for the test, though. It's nice to see how far Nikon has come.

With this performance, wish we could have seen a 24-200 @200mm compared to 28-300 @300. With more sharpness and narrower field of view the 24-200 might give better image when scaled up than the 28-300 :) Amazing. Anyway, thank you Ricci, this will be a must have lens for travel with a Z.

Hey Ricci, do you know if Nikon is planning a 70-200/f4 S or something similar? The f2.8 S version is more lens than I need, but I do want a constant aperture throughout the zoom range. Thanks.

To end: out of curiosity I bought the Z6 with the 24-200. Sold it half a year later because it is no match for the D700 and the 28-300. Just an opinion.

In my opinion nikon shld just make a f mount 24-200 too, to inprove quality or just introduce new version of 28-300 to imrpove optics quality

Is it too late to get the D750?

Image quality looks good, but I tend to prefer lenses with a constant aperture. I never liked lenses with variable/increasing aperture as the focal length increases.

Volume level is lower than normal. Please improve if possible. Thanks for good information. I am using Nikon for last 45 years.

hi ricci, i look up to your videos a lot for my lens decision making... however could you please test the lenses in different light conditions.. please don't take this comment as a criticism... you see not many have access to test lenses before buying and i am one such so people like me need some one like you to give us that info.. even a couple of sample test shots in low light conditions would be helpful..

Getting very hard for me to justify any more F mount lenses. I wonder if Nikon will look at redoing some of the favorite F mount lens to bring them up to this new standard.

A gremlin lives in the 28-300mm managing focus. Listen to it clicking on the video focus test... 😆

I would love to see pictures in the real world. Landscapes, sports, people.