Nikon 28-70 2.8

I have been researching lenses for wedding work and I thought that I would

purchase the nikon 28-70 2.8. The thing is that I can't seem to find it

available to purchase at the stores that I trust such as Adorama and B&H Photo.

Has this lens been discontinued and replaced by the 24-70 2.8? I didn't want to

pay the extra money for this lens but I think I might have to. Any insight as to

why I can't find this lens?

Yes, it is been replaced by 24-70. A lot of ppl praise 24-70 over 28-70 in quality, so far i

hv not see much of of fact that 24-70 is far superior. Since 28-70 was a wonderful lens, i

am sure 24-70 is a improvement but prob won't not "far superior".

 

I got mine 28-70 from B&H as their last batch. I love it. I got it mainly cuz i need the

aperture ring since 24-70 do not have it.

 

If you want a 28-70 for a good reason, i think ebay is your best bet to find one. It is

running about 900-1100usd in mint condition. It will save you more money to get it new

since so many ppl want the newest and 24mm reach.

 

Without a good reason, 24-70 is a good match with your auto body and you also gain in

distance a bit.

Katie, if you live in the US I would suggest buying a 28-70mm from www.keh.com. They have 5 of them right now with a price hovering around $1269. The 24-70 is $1699.

 

Both lenses are very good so only you can decide if a used lens at $1269 (with a few to several years of use) with no warranty is a better buy than a new lens with a 5 year warranty at $1699. They pop up from time to time on Fredmiranda.com and Nikonians.org as well as CL for less than $1000. People knock the price of the new 24-70mm. But guess what, I bought a 28-70 from an individual who still had the box and on that box was a sticker price of $1900! He bought that 28-70 in 1999.

 

Everyone's got an opinion (me too). I see a lot of knocking of new technology on forums like FM where people somehow feel the need to defend older lenses. Weird to me. Nobody said the 28-70 wasn't a good lens but if you feel 4mm is significant go for it. Nobody is calling it "far superior" but owners of older lenses somehow interpret feel they are being attacked. If you're not using an older manual SLR the "G" design is fine. People complain about not having an aperture ring but how many people are doing anything with them?

I second what John wrote. And you can definitely trust KEH. Their condition ratings are VERY

conservative. I've bought a lot of bargain grade equipment from them that looks virtually

new. They have a great return policy, too, so there's no risk other than the shipping cost.

Can't recommend them enough.

The 28-70mm/f2.8 is still in the Nikon USA printed 2008 Winter catalog, but there is clearly no point to make both that and the new 24-70mm/f2.8 AF-S G, so I am pretty sure that the 28-70 is discontinued. You either need to find some remaining stock or get the 24-70.

 

If you shoot weddings with either an FX-format DSLR or a 35mm film body, I would highly recommend the 24-70mm instead (unless you are using a manual body that is incompatible with G lenses). You are better off having more room to zoom out on the wide end in weddings.

Nikon's web site doesn't say anything about the 28-70 f2.8 lens being discontinued. You may want to email Nikon or call Nikon's 24/7 technical support at 1-800-645-6689, and find out what they have to say. The 28-70 is a wonderful lens. After you get information from Nikon about its status you may want to find out from a store like calumetphoto.com if they can get the lens for you. They pride themselves in being able to provide that kind of service.

It funny how new lenses generate a lot of "wow" from everyone and as soon as a replacement comes on the scene, and people will say the old one was crap.

In its day the 28-70 was a much praised lens. I still use mine on both a D300 and an F6. It's a beautiful lens. Yes, the new 24-70 is amazing, and it may very well be better, but it doesn't mean the 28-70 is bad.

I never heard any complaints about it when the 24-70 was not around.

I also still use my 20-35 2.8D and it is one of the finest in its class.

I've heard people say how awful they think it is too, but when it first hit the market many years ago it was the best thing since sliced bread.

It is mind boggling how fickle people become when technology changes.

I remember when the F4 was introduced, and the whole world was in love. "Greatest camera ever made" were the comments. Years later, I've heard, "hated the F4...what a tank...too heavy...too slow...never got used to it..." Well, I still have two and I think they are phenomenal cameras. Even though I don't shoot much film anymore, if I did, my F6 would be primary and my F4's would certainly be my backups.

Don't be discouraged if you can't afford the latest greatest. Most of the gear from the recent past is very acceptable for the toughest professional work...and you can get it much cheaper now.

 

Lou

Lou, exactly who is saying the older 28-70mm/f2.8 AF-S "is crap"?

I still own the 28-70 and have tested three different samples of the 24-70mm/f2.8 AF-S G as part of photo.net's D3 review. At least based on my testing, the 24-70 has worse vignetting at the widest setting at f2.8, but that is not entirely fair since it goes wider.

 

The 28-70 is still an excellent lens, but I think that 4mm difference on the wide end is significant. For weddings, I would go for the extra 4mm because you don't always have time to keep changing lenses.

No one here Shun, but I've always seen posts on forums that favor the newest gear and trash the old in order to justify buying the latest.

 

I love my 28-70 and have a lot of fun using it. I know the 24-70 is also a killer lens and having tried it out only once, I really want it. But my point was that we sometimes are so desirous of the newest gear we forget that the older stuff was top of the line too at one time. And...still worth having if the price is easier for us.

 

I agree also that having the extra 4mm is a plus, especially for weddings. I probably will not get it though until I have a D3. I really like the FF and 24-70 idea as I have done very well with my Canon 5D and 24-70 2.8L combo. I have a D300 that I use the 28-70 with but I don't see the advantage of 4mm since I also have a 20-35 if I need it.

 

Lou