The 24-70mm f/2.8 lens is the workhorse you will find in a ton of photographers' bags, as it provides a useful zoom range in tandem with a wide maximum aperture. That being said, such lenses are generally rather expensive. If you do not need that wide aperture, you can save a lot of money and get more reach by opting for a lens like the NIKKOR Z 24-120mm f/4 S. This great video review takes a look at the lens and the sort of performance and image quality you can expect from it in practice.
Coming to you from Matt Irwin Photography, this excellent video review takes a look at the Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-120mm f/4 S lens. I have long enjoyed using a lens like 24-105mm or 24-120mm f/4 over a 24-70mm f/2.8 simply because I always felt like 70mm was a bit limiting for general imagery like photo walks. And in addition to that extra reach, f/4 lenses are often lighter and significantly more affordable. If you don't need that extra stop of aperture, you might find an option like the 24-120mm f/4 more suited to your work. Check out the video above for Irwin's full thoughts on the lens.
Is about the same as the 16-80 (85) on my D500, nice range, and 2,8 is hardly missed nowadays. (Although on DX it would sometimes be nice for a softer "bokeh"
I've had this lens for almost 3 months now. It's pretty good.
If you are looking for absolute perfection, go with the 24-70 f2.8, F or Z mount. Better contrast, sharpness (slightly) and wow factor.
I've always preferred a 24-1XX f4 type lens over a 24-70. The 70mm cutoff on the long end always felt too limiting and if I needed a brighter lens the 2.8 wasn't usually enough anyway. I can just carry a small fast prime to complement the f4 lens when needed.