We don't usually test a product for ten years before reviewing it, but after a decade of using the Lowepro Photo Sport 300 AW II on an almost daily basis, Managing Editor Dale Baskin tells us why he loves this pack.

Most of the Nikon 24-70 f/4 lenses are actually selling around $400-450 either used or as a kit with a camera body.  It's a true bargain for the quality delivered.

It is far more complicated than that.  You are also considering two different systems, so now the camera and the overall system comes into play.

I have the Nikon 24-70 f/4 and it's not only one of the best kit lenses made, I think it's better than most of the F-mount lenses in this range.

Really? Comparing a $1000 lens to a $400 lens? If they were free, I would take the more expensive one, of course. Even if I didn't have a camera to fit it to. Then I would resell it.

"Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean. Because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Banzaihttp://jacquescornell.photographyhttp://happening.photos

Regardless of the optics, a lens that is wide open at f/7.1 is going to be severely limiting.  It may be fine for landscapes, but for street, portraits, and low light it's 1 2/3 stops slower than the Nikon lens at 70mm.  People pay a lot of money for one stop of difference in aperture.

Even if I was starting from scratch, the Z lenses quality together with what looks like the start of third party Z lenses AND the fact that if you absolutely need to you can get smart adapters from Sony FE and Canon EF ( not RF ) to Z might sway me to NIkon away from the obvious system which is Sony's FE mount - huge range of bodies new and old at good prices and large range of lenses some of which I read are better than the Canon or Nikon equivalents.

Focal length

"Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean. Because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Banzaihttp://jacquescornell.photographyhttp://happening.photos

I have the Nikon 24-70 f/4 and it's not only one of the best kit lenses made, I think it's better than most of the F-mount lenses in this range.

What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.

Doesfocal lengthaffectaperture

The other issue you have with a variable aperture lens is shooting in Manual mode.  If you set it at f/4, the aperture will be increased as you zoom and you may end up underexposed.  If you set it at f/7.1, your backgrounds become quite busy and you lack subject isolation.

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Really? Comparing a $1000 lens to a $400 lens? If they were free, I would take the more expensive one, of course. Even if I didn't have a camera to fit it to. Then I would resell it.

The correct answer is that a choice such as this comes down to your budget and uses.  If you just one one lens for walking around all day long and vacationing, the 24-105 is probably better.  For photojournalism, shooting a wedding or event, a 24-70 f/4 or f/2.8 is better.

Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.

Focal length vs aperturetelescope

Apertureandfocal lengthin photography

Generally speaking the faster a lens is and the more expensive a lens is, the better it is.  Also, the shorter the zoom range the better the lens is.  Zooms with a wide range lead to a lot of glass elements.  Each glass element adds it's own problems that then must be corrected, even with and yet another element!  The wider the range the more difficult it is to make a good lens and the quality will depend on when a manufacturer cuts off the budget for that lens.

Regardless of the optics, a lens that is wide open at f/7.1 is going to be severely limiting. It may be fine for landscapes, but for street, portraits, and low light it's 1 2/3 stops slower than the Nikon lens at 70mm. People pay a lot of money for one stop of difference in aperture.

Apertureof lens

The other issue you have with a variable aperture lens is shooting in Manual mode. If you set it at f/4, the aperture will be increased as you zoom and you may end up underexposed. If you set it at f/7.1, your backgrounds become quite busy and you lack subject isolation.

On film it always did train you, when using variable aperture zooms, to be careful to adjust SS/A accordingly.  I much preferred constant apertures like the 80-200 f4 - where, at least even if you have DoF changes you will still get the right exposure in M.   Nowadays I am lazy and just use manual mode + auto iso + exp comp but there are traps there if you don't know what you are doing.  However, something like the f4.5-5.6 on the consumer AF-P E is fine for me - but that is less than a stop.

Gear list: eyes, brain, hands and a couple of cameras.Instagram: @rodrigo_pasianiFlickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rodrigo_pc/albums/72157697391983321

A faster sensor, improved autofocus and video see Nikon's third-gen mid-range full-framer go toe-to-toe against Canon's EOS R6 II and the Sony a7 IV. We feel its all-round ability lifts it to the top of the pile.

The few reviews I have seen e.g. Cameralabs seem to quite like the Canon kit lens but I remain unconvinced:  its an S-line lens versus a non-L lens after all.  The Canon kit lens is probably priced OK for what it is.  The Nikon 24-70/4 is looking like a bit of a bargain.

Aperture focal lengthcalculator

You've missed the point. The OP's question is aperture vs. focal length (zoom range), which matters more? It's right there in the title.

F-stop andfocal length

Leica has announced the Q3 43, a variant of its full-frame fixed lens compact with a 43mm F2.0 normal lens. We've had the chance to use and test it, to produce an in-depth review.

In fact I know the Nikon is very good optically since I have and use it and I read that so is that non-L Canon kit lens.  You haven't mentioned the image quality/ optical performance of the lenses which, to me, is most important.  I guess that you have researched that separately.

That Canon kit lens is also only  f5.6 at 50mm.  I also think f7.1 at the long end is dimmer than I like to have.  Not too appealing for me - I would get a body and the 24-105 f4 L or whatever in preference.

Canon also makes a 24-70 in both f/2.8 and f/4.0. They are professional “L” series lenses with much better image and construction quality than the less expensive 24-105.

Aperture focal lengthformula

Really? Comparing a $1000 lens to a $400 lens? If they were free, I would take the more expensive one, of course. Even if I didn't have a camera to fit it to. Then I would resell it.

What’s the best camera for around $1500? These midrange cameras should have capable autofocus systems, lots of direct controls and the latest sensors offering great image quality. We recommend our favorite options.

the use and the camera would give a bit more context. as an allrounder, the nikon. for landscape/architecture on tripod only, the reach of the canon would give some advantage.