Discussion in 'Nikon' started by geo_lam, Aug 23, 2007.
There is a new lens 24-70 announced today.
Will 28-70 AFS drop price? or even stop production?
Probably will stop production.
Have you seen the 80-200/2.8 AFS in Nikon's catalog after the 70-200/2.8 VR came out? Nikon has already stopped production of the 28-70, judging from the backorder situation for the last 6 months.
This will be a killer lens for FF digital or film if Nikon keeps the same (or better) image quality of the 28-70. 24mm is WIDE, 28mm is kinda' wide. All they lack is VR.
The 70-200 AFS VR is the AFS version of the still produced 80-200 AF-D. They didn't drop it out of the lineup at all. Just no reason to have both as AFS when the price would have been about the same and it boiled down to whether or not you wanted VR.
But yes, production will probably stop on the 28-70.
I for one will be getting the 24-70; useful when I eventually go FF and actually usable on DX format (35-105 ish). The 28-70 was just a bit limited IMHO.
20-35/2.8 was replaced by 17-35/2.8, so 24-70 will replace 28-70.
Then 14-24 may replace 17-35?!
There is no point in continuing 28-70/2.8 where the new 24-70/2.8 covers and extends the zoom range at a similar price and (possibly) image quality.
I wish production of 17-35/2.8 continues, since it is such a beauty.
The 80-200 AFD is a much older design and somewhat inferior to the 80-200 AFS (and half the price). The AFS version was dropped from the Nikon catalog when the 70-200 VR was introduced. The IQ of the 70-200 VR is nearly the same as that of the 80-200 AFS, according to Nikon's published MTF curves. I have both lenses, and my experience is consistent with Nikon's evaluation.
Thank you for the clarification. I haven't been dealing with Nikon gear apparently as long as you, so I never had wind of the existance of an 80-200 AFS (Nor can I ever find one used, but now I may go hunting). I knew the design of the 70-200 was based off of an updated design from the 80-200, apparently I didn't realize there was a different 80-200 in the mix.
Until very recently, I also had both the 80-200mm/f2.8 AF-S and 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR. Effectively the VR version replaced the older 80-200. I have compared them very carefully and fould them to be similar optically.
I too don't see any point to have both the 24-70mm/f2.8 and 28-70mm/f2.8 in production. With people upgrading to the new model, there should be plenty of the old one in the used market. So exactly who is going to buy new 28-70's from Nikon?
I am not so sure about the 14-24mm/f2.8. I guess the current trend is towards super-wides, e.g. the Sigma 10-20mm for DX. Personally, I think the 17-35 is more than wide enough on a FX frame camera.
I think the 14-24 mm f/2.8 will be of great interest to people who own the bodies with the DX size sensors. That give them a fast 21-36mm zoom (after the crop factor) and it is still useful on their film and future FX bodies. Not bad.
I think the 14-24mm is a good move for Nikon. At least in my case. I shoot a lot of interiors
and having a faster lens would help (as opposed to the 12-24mm f/4). For the most part, I
always shoot my 12-24mm at 14mm or higher anyway.
The 24-70mm looks inviting as well, especially for FF, as many have mentioned here.
The 28-70 will undoubtedly be discontinued, the 35-70 AF-D fills the same roll in the line as the 80-200 AF-D does vs the 70-200 VR.
I do hope Nikon keeps the 17-35 around though. It's a more useful range on FF than the more specialist 14-24 (which I see as a better option for a DX kit or mixed DX/FF kit)
Since I shoot landscape, I think the 14-24 will be a stellar FF lens but I question how many DX owners will pay the extra $$$ for one more stop at the expense of wide angle. If I could afford the D3, adding the 14-24 with no fisheye would be a no brainer.
I plan to trade in my 28-70mm Nikkor for the 24-70mm. The 28-70mm is outstanding for stage and PJ work, though some claim that it is senseless on a DX body. [The 17-55mm is too wide for most front row stage work.] Add the 14-24mm Nikkor and I may sell my 17-55mm.
I've wanted something wider than 17mm for my DX bodies. The 12-24mm Nikkor seems to be the best out there now, but it's too slow and the IQ at 12mm suffers. Let's see how the 14-24mm performs. On a FF body, this lens should add some awesome ultra-wide capabilities, but it won't be for everyone.
Separate names with a comma.