NAS is winning me over... should I buy the 24-70mm F 2.8?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by juan_su, Jul 7, 2008.

  1. Hi guys,

    I've been contemplating buying the 28-70mm F 2.8 for the longest time. I could never justify it before, mainly
    because of the high cost and I was only doing freelance part time. Now things are different.. I'm not shooting
    for business as much, but more for personal pleasure. I have saved enough to the point where it will take a big
    chunk out of my savings but I feel I am willing to take the plunge. But it's just that it's a huge hole in my
    savings if I buy it....

    I'm pretty sure that I will see this as an investment. All the reviews that I had read so far would support my
    purchase decision. Help me out people! I'm soooooo close to buying it.
     
  2. If you're shooting FX format, sure. I'd go for the 24-70mm f2.8 if you're shooting DX format.
     
  3. I'm shooting DX with the D200 and full format with the F5 and F100 still with black and white film. I'm pretty sure one day I will invest in an FX as my D200 replacement.
     
  4. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Juan, I highly recommend that you wait. The 24-70 has been in short supply and is staying at its initial high price. It should be at least $200 cheaper when supply finally catches up, and it sounds like you don't need it immediately. Why waste your money on inflated prices now? I am pretty sure it is the same over in Canada.
     
  5. Juan,

    do you like thin or wider lenses? Sounds like a strange question I know, but fact is that I for one actually prefer how the 17-55DX feels in my hand for zooming than the 24-70mm f/2.8 which is thinner. If I had it to do all over again, then I'd buy the 28-70 instead. But that's just me.

    JMHO

    Lil :)
     
  6. because he has NAS, shun, don't you understand? waiting...is...not...an...option.
     
  7. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I never understand NAS; I think that is completely silly. My goal is high-quality images. Equipment is merely the necessary evil to achieve the goal.

    But I am too logical ....
     
  8. lol. logic and NAS don't mix too well, do they?
     
  9. NAS IS logical! Just ask Nikon!!!

    Since you are pretty sure you will be an FX user at some point, the 24-70mm is probably your best choice.

    I prefer the zoom range and feel of the 24-70mm FX over the 17-55mm DX (which I sold to get the 24-70). I am
    currently using it on the D300.
     
  10. I suspected it all along, Shun is a Vulcan! ;-)
     
  11. "I suspected it all along, Shun is a Vulcan! ;-)"

    hmm, maybe that's why he likes long lenses so much... could be he's trying to signal his spaceship so he can return to a logical planet. :}
     
  12. bmm

    bmm

    Shun - your post made me laugh! Theoretically I agree. But I too have NAS... and bad.

    For example I had been desperately, and I stress that word, clinging onto the view that I did not need to upgrade my D80 to D300 and that I would wait until a pro-sumer FX model came out before considering an upgrade (noting that an upgrade is utterly unjustifiable based on my skills and experience). I was hoping that this would 'buy' me 2-3 years of waiting time.

    So what happens while I'm overseas for work?? Nikon announces the D700 and in doing so destroys the psychological defence I had built to further emtying my wallet into their coffers. Damn them!

    Oh and to be even a little on-topic, I'm with Elliot. On my D80 (DX) I currently carry the 35 and 85 primes. This means I'd be far more likely to enjoy the 24-70 than the 17-55 even without thinking FX. Indeed if anything it might even be too wide for my taste on full-format. That said, I have not read many bad things about the lens...
     
  13. Juan, I highly recommend that you wait. The 24-70 has been in short supply and is staying at its initial high price. It should be at least $200 cheaper when supply finally catches up, and it sounds like you don't need it immediately. Why waste your money on inflated prices now? I am pretty sure it is the same over in Canada.

    --> Hi Shun! Thanks for your comments. The problem is that I can in fact get one now and the fact that Adorama has it and with free shipping, this is making it extremely hard for me to resist NAS.... Damn it! Oh by the way, I recently learned that you are from the South Bay area and I've been meaning to contact you directly, but yeah I'm no longer in Canada. I moved down to the Bay Area last year and live around the Santa Clara area. LOL

    Thanks for remembering about me being in Canada though! I'll contact you directly shortly. =) Now back to the point. I'm not sure whether I can resist NAS until this lens becomes available and becomes cheaper... I've been monitoring the 70-200 lens for the past 2 years and well... it NEVER seems to get to the point LOL
    Are others on board with me on this? So yeah I think I will just have to bite bullet here.... oohhhhh.. do I or do I not???
     
  14. Hi Lil!

    I totally get what you were saying... to be honest. I have dreamed of owning the FAT 28-70mm for the longest time. To be that lens was the pinnacle of standard zooms. I could spot one out from a mile away whenever I went on a shot or traveled. The 24-70mm is thinner and heavier, but to be I still think that 28-70mm is much better suited in term of shape for me. LOL
     
  15. Hey Eric,

    lol. logic and NAS don't mix too well, do they?

    NO I don't think it makes any sense. I think this is why it is so hard to resist. If NAS was logical, then I wouldn't have to fight it so hard. LOL
     
  16. Oh no... the more I respond to this thread, the more I'm tempted to visit my shopping cart...... I MUST... RESIST.... maybe for one more day....
     
  17. After a quick test with Ilkka Nissil�it would seem that on a D300 the 24-70/2.8 performed very poorly at 24 mm. We will most likely do a bit more testing, but I would be cautious in getting this lens for high res DX work. Photozone does not seem to confirm this, but they used a different camera and a different testing method...

    In terms of focal lengths, the 24-70 is a huge think that gives a quite moderate wide angle on DX. I see it as primarily a lens for FX users.
     
  18. The fast 24-70 and 28-70 Nikkors are excellent lenses. In terms of sheer sharpness the 24-70 is the better one,
    but sometimes I wonder if the more mellow "draw" of the 28-70 wouldn't be kinder to the subject in place of the
    almost clinical rendition offered by the 24-70. So if you intend to do portraits, the older lens might be the
    better choice. I'm currently investigating whether the same can hold for close-ups (both lenses do exhibit some
    blue fringing focused to their near limit, but I feel the background might be rendered better with the 28-70,
    plus it handles an extension ring well). For high-contrast light situations, the 24-70 produces much less flare
    than the 28-70. Deciding between these two isn't easy, but Nikon probably alleviates this problem by
    discontinueing the 28-70 :)

    For a "walk-around" lens on a FX (D3, D700), either lens would function just fine. 28mm is plenty wide for that
    format, at least for me.
     
  19. Dave Lee wrote: ---- "If you're shooting FX format, sure. I'd go for the 24-70mm f2.8 if you're shooting DX format." ----

    And - considering also other remarks about prices going down somewhat in the near future - I agree with him.

    And yes, I have this itching feeling again too.
     
  20. "... on a D300 the 24-70/2.8 performed very poorly at 24 mm... "
    I`m really surprised! Oskar, althought I didn`t checked it via "pixel peeping" my impression is that this lens is really really sharp. Past week I have been using it for a clothes brochure, and the images seems to me sharper than ever!
    Has been this issue posted here? Could you provide a link? I`m interested in your experience.
     
  21. When I bought it (one of the very first samples) I try to remember I experienced some focus errors/shift at closer distances, testing it on a D300 too. On FF cameras it has a noticeable vignetting at 24 to 28mm... but nothing else, thought.
     
  22. Has been this issue posted here? Could you provide a link? I`m interested in your experience.
    No -- the difference in quality was so significant that I have been reluctant to write about it before doing more tests (which should come in a couple of weeks time...) I have not detected any fault in the test setup and both Ilkka and I were quite surprised. The performance on D3 was good though. The other tested lenses (24/3.5 PC, Zeiss 25/2.8, AF-D 24/2.8) performed pretty much as expected. I'll try to see if I could provide some more comprehensive results...due to the weather, this test was restricted to an infinite focus test on a architetural subject. I'm not ruling out the possibility of some error, I'm just saying that for a D300 user, caveat emptor.
     
  23. Just so I know... What is NAS? And I too have some $ for a great lense.
     
  24. NAS = nikon acquisition syndrome

    its sooooooo painful!
     
  25. Ah crap... gang thanks for all your support, but I have to say that NAS just won me over. I did, I hit submit and now the funds are being yanked out of my account. But at least I should get the a lens that I have been dreaming of for years! I'm so excited to receive it but so not looking forward to getting the credit card bill...

    Damn it NAS!
     
  26. Jose this is a real fun one

    http://www.photo.net/bboard/nw-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Gsiu&tag=
     
  27. "The things we own, end up owning us" -- Tyler Durden
     
  28. Just to throw a spanner in the works, I'll be using the grand daddy of the 24-70 f/2.8 when I buy the D700. 35-70 f/2.8! Can be had for dirt cheap now!
     

Share This Page