Some technical junk:
- White Balance: Auto
- ISO: 200
- EXIF information is preserved in the images
- Lens was mounted on Nikon D3s FX Camera and Gitzo tripod
- Focusing was performed through Live-View Contrast Detect. After each successful focus acquisition, focus was switched to manual to prevent camera refocusing
- Mirror Lock-Up mode with Exposure Delay set to “On” and remote cable release to completely eliminate camera shake
- Long exposure NR: Off
- Image Format: RAW & JPEG
- Lightroom settings: Default settings, but exposure had to be slightly adjusted for some images
- Lightroom export: sRGB JPEG Quality 80
- Testing was performed at f/2.8, f/4.0, f/5.6 and f/8.0 apertures
- Nothing was moved during testing
11) Sharpness Test – Nikon 24-70mm @ 24mm Center Frame
Either hover your mouse or click on each image to see the aperture settings. Top left: f/2.8, Top right: f/4.0, Bottom left: f/5.6, Bottom right: f/8.0.
As I have said before, the performance in the center is stellar, even wide open at f/2.8. Take a look at the f/2.8 and f/8.0 and see if you can spot a difference – they look identical. The center is equally sharp at all apertures.
12) Sharpness Test – Nikon 24-70mm @ 24mm Corner Frame
What about the corners? The situation in the corners, unfortunately, is not the same as in the center. Take a look at the following 100% crops:
At 24mm @ f/2.8, the corners suffer from heavy vignetting, softness and distortion. By f/4.0, the situation gets much better and we can see immediate improvement in sharpness and much less vignetting. When we get to f/5.6 and beyond, vignetting is almost completely gone and the image is sharper. However, there is a slight amount of color fringing present (see left bottom side of numbers 5 and 6).
13) Sharpness Test – Nikon 24-70mm @ 35mm Center Frame
Let’s now take a look at 35mm in the center:
Just like at 24mm, the 24-70mm shows superb performance in the center at 35mm. Every single image is extremely sharp and I cannot see any difference between f/2.8 and f/8.0 – truly remarkable performance.
What about the corners? For my lens sample, the situation in the corners at 35mm is actually worse than at 24mm. Although there is less vignetting, sharpness-wise, the lens suffers the most between 35 to 40mm.
14) Sharpness Test – Nikon 24-70mm @ 50mm Center Frame
How about 50mm and beyond?
Just like I have stated before, this lens delivers consistently sharp results at all focal lengths and apertures in the center! For the sake of saving bandwidth, I am not going to post crops from the corners at different focal lengths, because they all look very similar, with sharpness getting better above 35-40mm.
About Nasim Mansurov
Awesome review once again. I this is defiantly on lens that I will work towards getting. Maybe I will get the 14-24 first, I am not quite sure yet.
One thing that is missing on the 24-70 is VR…but then again you cannot get everything and it might appear on the next version of this lens.
Only reason why I am contemplating to buy this baby with a DX D90 camera is simply because I will upgrade to FX at some point. I am hoping the predecessor to D700 will come this year or maybe in the beginning of next year.
Once again great job!
Thank you for your feedback Morten!
Yes, VR would certainly be a great addition, but it would increase the weight and the price of the lens even more…hopefully Nikon will find a way to add VR to it in the future (I doubt it will happen any time soon though).
If you are going to upgrade to FX, this lens would be a great investment, along with the 14-24mm. That’s why they call them the Nikon “trinity” :)
Thank you for this very good review, i was waiting for it:)
I’m going to buy my first FX camera this autumn so it helps:)
BTW – Nikon should make another 24-70 f2.8 lens with VR system – it does help!
Michael, you are most welcome and thank you for your feedback! It is a good idea to wait until fall, especially the Photokina event where Nikon will introduce something new, for sure :)
As I stated in the above comment, I would not wait for a VR version of this lens anytime soon…
Hello Nasim,
Very good review, as usual, but I would like to raise your attention to something that, to me, looks like a typo. On page 3 you mix the 16-35 lens with 17-35, can you please check which one is the correct one?
Reason I’m asking is because the section header mentions 24-70 vs 16-35, so I was not expecting to see a mention to 17-35.
Thanks and take care!
Rod, it is not a typo – I wanted to add some info about the 17-35mm as well, because I tested it together with the 16-35mm.
Let me know if you have any questions and thank you for your feedback!
Thanks for the sharing. I have to agree that the 24-70 looks unbalance with D90. It’s really heavy, but the images produced are really sharp. Yes, additional of VR will definitely be useful. One thing that is stopping me from getting 16-35 is the distortion. I’m not sure about the outcome on D90 but I’m learning more from Lightroom 3 now. Maybe very soon I will change my mind.
Dennis
Dennis, how do you like your 24-70mm on the D90 so far? Do you wish it was a little wider on the short side?
Distortion is not a big problem in most cases – both 24-70mm and 16-35mm have a considerable amount of distortion and vignetting, but the 16-35mm is definitely worse. As Adobe releases more and more lens/camera profiles for Lightroom 3, distortion will be much easier to deal with. As of now, there is no 16-35mm profile in the latest version of Camera RAW, but I’m sure we will be getting more lens profiles soon :)
On one hand, I really find it unbalance on D90, looks weird. I find the 24-70 mm is almost mid tele-zoom on D90. On the other hand, this lens give me what I paid for. Instantly the pictures tells you its worthiness. And yes, I always like a wide zoom lens.
Nevertheless, I still think that I won’t get the best performance of this lens if I kept to DX body. I am pretty much pondering now whether to stick to this setup and wait for upgrade of new D700. Or I stick to DX, put it on a market and use the return to get myself the 18-200 mm vrII & 16-35 mm. Is not an easy choice for me.
In the meantime now, I actually acquiring for 50 mm f1.4G in exchange with my 35 mm f1.8 plus top-up.
Dennis, don’t trade it for the 18-200mm! Wait until a new D700 comes out and enjoy it for now :)
I will stick to D90 for now but I will most probably get 16-35mm and 50mm f1.4g in return for my needs. I have certainly enjoy using 24-70mm for its quality.
Nasim,
Great review. A question regarding your comment about a NEW D700? Do you know if Nikon is updating their D700 this year?
Great review, Nasim.
This is a terrific lens, and a superb piece of equipment for FX users.
My only complaint is weight – it would be nice to have a light weight 24-85 or 24-105 for hiking.
Let’s see what Nikon will release at the Photokina.
Best, P :)
Thank you Pasquier!
I agree, a lightweight 24-105mm would be great, which I think we will see this year at Photokina :)
I certainly hope so – it would be a pity to see a rehash of the of the old 24-120mm (see Nikonrumors), which is optically not great. Look forward to seeing your report on the 300mm f2.8 – a superb lens – in all it forms, the 300mm 2.8 has always ranked as one of Nikons best lens designs.
Pasquier, the new 24-120mm will be announced tonight, along with 3 more lenses :)
Hello Nasim,
Great review! I had bought the 16-35 and 50mm f/1.4G under you suggestion and I was really glad that i had turned to the right person. Thank you so much for your suggestion!
I had visited to the Shanghai Expo and tested the lens and I totally loved them! The 16-35 worked great at night and i managed to get really sharp images at low shutter speed down to 1/3th of a second. The 50mm, as usual, works great at anytime. No regret at all. Thx again! :)
Stephen, I’m very happy to hear that my advice has been working great for you! Thank you for your feedback!
DpReview posted a review of the 16-35mm and their findings are very similar to mine, except their test sample had some problems at 35mm…
Hi,
My Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S don’t keep the focus when the focale is changed, for example, I focus on a jubject at 35mm, hold the focus, and when I zoom in to 70mm the subject become “out of focus”.
The 24-70mm is not suposed to be a “true zoom” ?
Mine is acting as a parfocale zoom.
Is it normal or is my 24-70mm a bad sample ?
Thanks.
Alex.
I meant “mine is acting as a VARIfocal lens”
Alex, it is normal for a lens to lose focus when you zoom in and out – you should reacquire focus every time when you touch the zoom. And yes, it is very normal.
assalam dear mansour,
In your review, you are saying “While storing or transporting the lens, I highly recommend to keep the zoom ring at 50mm to prevent dust from getting into the lens through the front of the lens” which means 16-35 is better construction than 24-70 against dust, water and wheather ? ?
becoz i need to buy either 16-35 or 24-70 and im bit confusing to choose one among two. so which one should have to choose? by quality of image and by construction.
Afsel, no lens is fully protected against dust and moisture, which is why they say “resistant” :)
If sharpness is your concern, go with the 24-70mm. If dust resistance is your concern, go with the 16-35mm (although I would not leave the lens without the rear cap).
Nasim,
How do you know if you got a gray market item? Is it easy to tell? I purchased the 24-70mm lens in Germany and was told by the store that it did not come with a Warranty????????
Do you know anything about Gray Market Nikon items? I am still able to return it as I just bought it today. Do you Think that an extended service through Mack Camera would do the trick if I don’t get a warranty? Or should I return and order one from the US? Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks.
SGT Gutierrez, George
George, gray market lenses typically do not have all the warranty paperwork inside the boxes and their serial numbers do not normally have the two letter country codes. If the store says that the lens did not come with the warranty, it is most likely a gray market version.
I have used some Gray Market products in the past and never had a problem with them…
Hello Nasim,
I would appreciate your advice please, I have a D300 and a D90 and the lenses I have at present are an 18-70 f3.5-4.5 G ED, 70-300 f4-5.6D ED (non VR which I want to get rid of), the new 60mm f2.8 ED Micro and an 80-400 VR.
I want to buy the 16-35 f4 VR for landscapes but am wondering what you would suggest to fill the gap between this lens and the 80-400. I was thinking of the new 24-120 f4 VR or would the 24-70 f2.8 be a better choice?
Regards,
Kevin Hawke
Kevin, I think the 24-120mm f/4.0 VR would be a better choice for you to fill the gap, since it gives you a better range than the 24-70mm. Plus, having VR really helps…
Great website and reviews. I have 16-35, 50, 70-700, 105 and D700. I hope to have another body next year and was wondering if the 24-120 f4 would handle tough travel and last the course. I thought about 24-70 and cropping when required if I only could take one lense. I have tried the 24-120 and it is sharp but the construction is only semiprofessional it would seem and not made in Japan. Very confusing. Hope you might have time for thoughts. By the way is VR really necessary on a 24-70.
Darrell, the 24-120mm would not handle tough travel as good as the 24-70mm would. The 24-70mm has a much better build than the 24-120mm and I personally would not take the 24-120mm with me to sand dunes or other dusty areas. Plus, you can bump the 24-70mm against hard surfaces and it will live, but not sure if 24-120mm would survive, since it is mostly plastic. VR certainly helps and it is a huge plus on the 24-120mm side though, especially if you shoot hand-held a lot.
Thanks. So does the VR outweigh the 24-70 if you could only bring one lense. Day to day parties etc and travel. Or buy 24-120 and wait for 24-70 replacement by maybe vr version or 24-105 . May I ask you thoughts.
Nasim,
Thank you for sharing your knowledge. You hava passion for photgraphy and life and it shows!
I currently use a D300 (upgraded from a D70s), love the body! So much easier to handle and work on the fly with changing settings. I recently purchased the 24-70 (with the idea that someday soon I will move to a FX camera and this lens is the starting point for me for building to the trinity) and have started to put it through some paces. I tihnk the lens is crisp, crisp , crisp.
I really like your website, your approach and what your content. I would love to get your feedback on these shots taken (as photographer) , with a 24-70. I’ve only put up a few . if you can spare a moment. Thank you.
http://flickr.com/gp/azim-pictures/66ZNC0
Kind Regards
Azim
Azim, the Nikon 24-70mm is definitely one of my most favorite lenses – I take it with me every time I go out to shoot landscapes.
I liked your images of flowers and architecture – the images certainly look very good and crisp. You will certainly see a lot of value in switching to FX, especially with the 24-70mm that will give you wider angles to work with.
Good luck with your photography and keep up the good work!
Best in-depth review I have read on the 24-70. I own both the 24-70 & the 14-24 & find them exceptional in terms of ease-of-use and sharpness. Much of my photography takes place in remote areas of SouthWest Tasmania where the light is wonderful . Yes, both lens are heavy, but the results make it worth the effort in carrying them. Pack weight 25kg. For landscape I find myself using the 14-24 a bit more than the 24-70. I guess I just love those wide angles.
John, thank you for your feedback. I agree, I love both the 14-24mm and the 24-70mm for landscapes. You are lucky to be in Tasmania!
Hi Nasim,
Great review.
I purchased this lens to help me take photos of my new baby. But I’ve come up with a slight problem with it.
I use AF-C mode and tend to shoot multiple frames of the same shot (it’s digital why not…right?). I haven’t had any problems with my other lens (18-200 and 50/1.4) but with this lens, I have encountered an odd, shall I say “symptom”. The lens seems to make slight focus adjustments constantly, even if the subject and I have not moved.
I’m not sure if it’s okay to post links on your site but I have put up a detail description on dpreview forums and was wondering if you had any though to this “symptom” or if this is normal.
Here are the link (feel free to take it down if you must and I will copy and paste it on here instead)
Description: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=36951338
Sample Photos: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=36977803
Thanks.
Lawrence, not sure how I missed your comment, but I apologize for a late reply.
Have you tried using your 50mm f/1.4 in the same situation to see how it would focus? The Nikon 24-70mm has a very fast AF motor and it is quite normal for it to refocus when the camera cannot determine what the correct focus point should be. The best way for you to test whether there is something wrong with your lens, is to set up a test chart on the wall in very bright conditions. Use the same AF-C mode and the same settings, then half-press the shutter to focus and see if it does the same ting. Focus in the center of the lens chart, where you have the largest object and there is enough contrast on it. If your lens does the same thing, try your 50mm and see how it behaves. If your 50mm does not do it, then there is something wrong with your lens. If your 50mm does the same thing, then you might have an AF problem on your camera.
I believe the problem you have is related to AF issues in low light. I would recommend to use the center AF point and see if the results get any better.
My 24-70mm and other lenses behave similarly under very dim conditions (especially candle light) and it is quite normal.
This review helps me to decide on which lens that I should bring for my vacation in London and Paris next month. I was thinking of 50mm f/1.8. But after reading this review, I’ll take my 24 – 70 for the vacation.
Thanks a lot!
Hamid, I would take both, if you can :) The 50mm does not take up much space and will work great for portraits.
First of all thanks for all the work you do here educating us..
I am thinking of the 24-70 or 17-55 for my D300S. Can you help me with how I should approach this choice. What should I be asking myself? When I shoot people I usually use my 80-200D but it is heavy for me and I can’t hand hold it successfully below 1/100.
Alex, I would not go for either on a DX body. Take a look at the Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR instead…
First – sorry but I mistakenly posted a question on your photo page.
I really like what you have done/doing. Your site is awsome!!
I’ve recently purchased the D7000 and have for lenses 50mm 1.8, 18-105, 70-300
I want to better my portait abilities and looking / asking for some advise
- what are your thoughts of using the 24-70 vs the 70-200? I’m doing portiats and have 3 weddings under my belt with 2 to take this summer. I’ve also been asked to do (possible) some pictues for a realistate company – none as of yet but been reading and find number of photos are taken with say a 10-24 range.
Any help you can provide would be appreciated. From what I’ve read, you really put a lot of thought into what you do. I want my next purchase to be right for what I need. I could even look at selling the 70-300 or kit lens as an option.
Thanks for reading/listening.
Todd
Todd, for portraiture/weddings, I would go with the Nikon 70-200mm.
Nasim,
I’ve learned a lot from my friend helping out as a second shooter at the weddings. I find that when in tight areas or doing wide shoots of the wedding party I pull out my 18-105. Most of the time I use a 50mm or 80-200 (80-200 is my friends lens – I opted to wait and try out his stuff to see what I would like. I think it would be good to get a 70-200 (vrI vs vrII?) but what do you suggest for wider shots – stay with the 18-105 for now and eventually get a 70-24 or what? I have a wedding to do on my own in October and been looking for a 70-200, but my friend has offerered me his lens, an extra body. Note – at the time writing this, I found a 24-70 at a shop which looks new for 1500.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Todd, if you do decide to get the 70-200mm, get the VR II version. As for wide shots, unless you find the 18-105mm limiting, I would just continue using it. If you are not happy with sharpness and colors, the Nikon 16-85mm VR or the Nikon 16-35mm VR (if you are planning to go FX in the future) would be great choices to cover the wide angles. The 24-70mm is not going to be so wide on your D7000, because it would be equivalent to a 36-105mm lens. Unless you have plans to move to full-frame within the next year or so, I would not get the 24-70mm.
Hi, I need some advice what lense better to buy. I have Nikon D700 with 24-85 f 2.8 now. I would like to update this lense for something better. I am looking for 24-70 f2.8 or prime 85 mm 1.4 G. I don’t know should I keep mine 24-85 and only buy 85 mm 1.4 G. I don’t know how much better 24-70 than 24-85? I am not professional but it is my passion since 2001. I am not a professional but I am strongly developing my skills. I am shooting family, portraits, church events, weddings. What should I buy in my case? Thank you.
Irina, I apologize for such late response, I somehow missed your comment. Since you shoot portraits and weddings, I would say get the 85mm now. The 24-70mm is a great lens, but you already have that range covered with your 24-85mm…
Hello, nassim,
First, I enjoy and appreciate your reviews My question. Having just bought a d3s and 16-35 vr zoom I am looking for a mid range zoom for 70% of my pics, I plan to use this together with my d300 and my long term combo, the dx 12 24 and 17-55. These two lenses are my standards. For long shots the 70-300 vr is almost as good as the older but heavier 80-200. I am considering the following for the d3s. A new 24-70, a used 28-70′ or the new 24-120 vr zoom. Nb I still have and use my old 24-85 f 2.8-4 as a walk around. Any suggestions. Robert Lewis. Nb I live in Santa Fe, take pics here, in rocky Mt np, and NYC.
Robert, I apologize for such a late response – I somehow missed your comment. The 24-70mm will pair very nicely with the D3s. I have been using this particular combo since D3s was released and I love the results. The 28-70mm is not as sharp and the 24-120mm lacks the rugged lens body for my use (or better say abuse). Since you shoot in different weather conditions, I would say the 24-70mm is a better fit for you.
Very thorough and well written review. Thanks. I was using a Sigma 24-70mm EX HSM with my D3S, but I just bought the Nikkor 24-70 and received it today. I am doing some test shots right now.
I was disappointed in the Sigma. I found it lacked sharpness especially from f/2.8 to f/4 and even f/5.6. So far, the Nikon seems to be much sharper, although I haven’t put it through much of a test yet.
Thanks.
Tom
Tom, I am currently testing the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and I found it to have front focus issues. I had to dial +10 AF adjustment in my camera to get acceptable results, so your sample might have had some focus issues. Either way, I do not think the Sigma can match the performance of the 24-70mm Nikon…
Hello,
I use d90 but i think to buy d800 when it is available for sales. Now i would like to upgrade my lens 18-105. Which lens do you advise me to buy? 24-70 2.8 or 24-120 4VR? Main use is for traval and portrait
Igor, as Tom stated below, the 24-70mm is a huge lens, so the weight and size can be problematic for travel. I would say the 24-120mm would probably be a good fit for you, unless you are a landscape photographer and need the weather sealing and rugged body of the 24-70mm…
Igor,
I now use the 24-70mm f/2.8 all the time, however, it is a very big and heavy lens. I haven’t used the 24-120mm f/4VR myself, but for travel you may find it to be a better alternative.
Hi Nassim,
I like your photo from St. Augustine, Florida. I just returned from there this past weekend. It’s a great place to get some interesting architectural images.
Tom
Thank you for your feedback Tom!
I have two lenses in mind to purchase and am having a hard time comparing the pros and cons.
Nikon 24 1.4G or the 24-70 2.8 (I currently have nikon 85mm 1.4 and LOVE it!)
I currently do a lot of portrait work… the 85mm 1.4 is amazing, but I can’t get close up for weddings or event coverage. Which lens will I want most and why? They both seem great. I like the idea of having a zooom range ability and not being locked into one focal range, but the 24 1.4G seems to have a higher price tag meaning better photos? Please help me shop? I also have a Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 and Nikon 18-70mm 3.5-4.5. I want a lower F-stop (I keep hearing about a massive differences and after using my 85mm and 70-200mm I KNOW there is a difference and I need to upgrade. Can you help me or suggest others I should be looking into? Thank you.
Shauna
Shauna, I like both 24mm and 24-70mm lenses and that’s a tough choice. I personally think that the 24-70mm would be more useful for weddings, since you have the zoom range to work with. Plus, it nicely compliments your 70-200mm lens…
Hi Nasim,
As of now I have D90, 24-70 f/2.8 along with few nice Fx & dx lenses but, hard to admit that D90 is not at all suitable match for 24-70 which is my most favorite lens. Since I am waiting for the replacement of d700 for a long time but due to previous miss-happenings in Japan, it’s got delayed. Apologizes but now it’s truly tough to wait any more. What do you advise, should i wait for the new launch or go for d700 as I also know it’s a nice camera..
Regards
Dear Hasim,
Please advise the question that PM asked. Im waiting for the replacement of D700. and recent news mention that D700 replacement is not release in this year. Should i buy D700 or wait for another 1yr for better version? anyway the price make alot different too. Please advise for PM and me. Appreicated!
Kevin, please see my response above – I am recommending to wait till the end of August.
PM, sorry for a late response. At this time, I would recommend to wait – Nikon will have a new camera announcement in less than a month.
Hello Nasim,
Just 10 days ago I purchased the Nikkor 24-70mm 2.8G lens for my D700 but after shooting with it outsite yesterday, I have a doubt with its performance in direct sunlight. When shooting in direct sunlight, I can see slight over exposure at times thus resulting in loss of detail and slight colour fading too even when I set the WB to direct sunlight and Picture Control to Vivid on my D700. I set my metering to Matrix and ISO to 200. Is this normal ?
I also have the new 28-300mm where I haven’t noticed such problem. Do you think this piece that I have (Nikkor 24-70mm) may be problematic one. Please advise. Thanks.
If you can, would appreciate a speedy response as if I have to, then I can still replace this 24-70mm lens till this Wednesday, 03Aug11. Thank you.
Best regards,
Pranav
Pranav, if your image is overexposed, try lowering the exposure by using the exposure compensation button or switch to Manual mode. When shooting against direct sunlight, cameras often get confused and can give wrong exposure. Color fading and slight loss of detail is normal and should be expected when shooting against the sun. That’s why the lens has a big hood – if you are not careful abiut how you position the sun in your frame, you might get some nasty results. Also, if you have a low quality clear filter in front of your lens, try to remove it and see if there is any change. Additional glass can result in more reflections and can spoil the image quality.
Hi Nasim,
Thanks your prompt response.
The sun’s not in the frame at all. The subject wearing a brillliant white and a navy blue (big blocks of navy blue) checked shirt was standing opposite the sun and I can see too much light being reflected from the white of the shirt thus fading the navy blue away too.
Also, in some other snap, another subject wearing an orange pullover was showing slightly yellowish although I had set the WB to sunlight mode. That’s the reason of my worry. At some points, I could see overly warm pictures and at other times slightly harsh pictures. All in all, I can summarise that my pictures have become overly sensitive to light inspite of using the right WB settings. It was an extremely sunny day in London last Saturday when I shot these however, with the right WB, I didn’t expect it. Hence my worry if the lens is alright because I thought its supposed to have Nano Crystal coating too.
As for the filter, I use Hoya HD UV filter for all my lenses. Hope that’s alright. Please advise. Thanks.
Hi Nasim,
I lowered the Exp. Comp as per your advise and also the aperture and it did help. Thanks to your suggestion.
I was a bit worried otherwise. Maybe got a bit paranoid because I didn’t return the Coolpix 8100 (which I gifted my wife) even after observing on the very first day itself that the pictures it shot were absolutely horrid !! Not sure if its only my piece which is bad and not comparing it to the pictures with my D700 either. I thought I will adjust the settings and it should be fine but the pictures it shoots look absolutely lifeless. Compared it with a Panasonic DZ8 which were full of life and more than acceptable. And now I am out of the initial cool off period and on the mercy of Nikon support.
Anyway, I am now holding on to my new toy, the Nikkor 24-70mm. Thanks for your advise. Appreciate it. Keep up the good work. All the best.
Hi Nasim.
Excellent review on the 24 70. Thank you. I’ve been wanting to buy a 24 70 but my friend says I’m better off with a 35 and 50 prime 1.4. What do you think? I own the D90, 70 200, 105, 17 55 and 18 200 but would like to upgrade to fx
Thanks,
Stanton
Stanton, I guess it depends on what you want to do. Until you upgrade to FX, I do not think it would be a good idea to get the 24-70mm – your 17-55mm is wider and gives you a similar range. Looks like you already have a 105mm prime for portraits – why do you want to get a 35mm or a 50mm prime? Do you feel you need something shorter?
Hi Nasim,
Thanks for the quick reply. I do plan on upgrading to fx (waiting for the D800) and plan to trade the 17-55 for the 24-70 when i do so. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Well my friend just suggested cause he thinks the 35 and 50mm primes are much sharper /nicer than the 24-70 (which is expected from a prime of course). But do you think the 24-70, given its versatility and built is still comparable over the 35 and 50mm 1.4 primes? Or do you think its not a valid comparison?
Thanks
Stanton
Hi Nasim,
Thank you for the great reviews – your opinion is much appreciated!
I am thinking of investing in the 24-70 lens, but I wonder if it’ll be too heavy for my Nikon D3000? Could you please advice?
Thank you!
Maria
Maria, yes, it will be very heavy for your D3000 – it is like 3 times heaver and much bulkier. Why don’t you get the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 instead? If you need to go wider, the Nikon 16-85mm is a better choice.
I have been reading about your opinions about the 50mm f/1.8g and the 24-70mm and they have been very helpful. I would love to get the d700, but I keep hearing about the new d700 or the d800. do you think that there are going to be a lot of changes and should wait for the new one to come out ?
Hi Nasim,
I would say it is the best site for unbiased, professional and detailed feedback. Thank you for all the efforts you are putting in. I liked the your assessment of nikon 24-70mm lense. I would love to own one but due to the price range it falls in, I cannot afford it now. Photography is my hobyy and interested in portrait and landscape. Instead of nikon i was planning to invest in Sigma 24-70mm f.28 and Tokina 11-16mm f.28 to suit my needs and budget. What is your advise?
Steven, thank you for your feedback. Unfortunately, since I have not tested either the Sigma or the Tokina, I cannot provide any recommendations. I am planning to review those lenses in the future though…
Dear Nasim,
Again, an excellent review. It seems that the 24-70 is the prefect walk around lens for a FX body. But what about DX body? I would really love it if you can write a review on DX lens like 16-85 or even 18-100. Just my suggestion. Cheers.
Barry
Barry, I will definitely write some more reviews on DX lenses. Just need to finish up some projects and I will do that :) 16-85mm is a wonderful lens – I would highly recommend it for DX.
Dear Nasim,
thank you very much for your review of the 24-70mm. Based onit I purchased it one week ago and may say that it meets all my expectations. The bodies I have are the D300 and D700. It works on both of them quite nice. With the post-processing DxO or the Lightroom the pictures are really good.
I have to mention that I have calibrated my monitors with the spyder3pro and usually use a grey-card from Seculine, the ProDisk II. An investment which paid off already many times.
Without your reports I would have had almost purchased the new AF-S NIKKOR 24-120 mm 1:4G ED VR. It has in some magazines some quite good critics, but I guess, those are not unbiased.
Once again, thank you very much for your advice!
Walter
Walter
I know you said this would be too heavy and bulky for the D3000, but I guess I am trying to justify with myself to spend the $1,800 on this great lens when I will be potentially upgrading to the FX line. I just don’t want to spend $1,200 on the D7000 and have a mediocre lens that I already and then later upgrade to, say, the D700 and use the same mediocre lens. I understand you can’t make that decision for me, but this is what is tormenting me. :) Great review by the way.
Dear Nasim,
thx for your great review. I’m a (happy?) owner of the 24-70, as well as of the 24/1.4, 35/1.4 and 14-24, together with a d700. My finding is that the 24-70 needs a considerably higher amount of sharpening to deliver the same crisp images I’m used getting from my other lenses with much less sharpening. Is this likely to be due to a lower microcontrast of the 24-70? Same sharpening applied as with the other lenses, images taken with the 24-70 look a little mushy. As long as I’m shootin at lower ISOs, the final result after strong sharpening ist quite nice, however, such strong sharpening does not work that easily with images taken at higher ISO. Do you have similar findings or are my images indicating that I’ve got a lemon? Any ideas are highly appreciated!
Matt
Hi Nasim,
Great review on the 24-70! I was wondering if you’ve experienced any issues with the zoom ring on your copy of the lens. I’ve been debating buying this lens for quite some time, but the one crippling flaw that’s been holding me back has been the apparently-widespread issue with stiff zoom rings. Given that you’ve had yours for quite some time now, I think that any problems that would have appeared would have done so by now. Thanks in advance for your time!
Best,
Bob
Dear Nasim,
I’m thinking of upgrading from Nikon D90 to Nikon D700. I was thinking of purchasing the camera body vs the camera with the kit lens. I’m thinking the difference in price for the camera body vs the kit lens I can put towards a good basic lens. For a basic all around go and grab lens is the
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED the best choice???? Currently, the lens that I own that I can use on the D700 are as follows:
1. AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G ED
2. AF-S Nikkor 85 mm 1:1.4 G N
3. AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1:1.8 G
Once, again, thanks for all your help, advice, and great resource!!!! :)
Kathy B.
hi, i have a d7000 and have been looking at this lens in particular for family pics mostly (3 active kids under 6 y/o). so i use 35mm prime a lot but find that since they move a lot i don’t always have time to get the shot. so this range seems to suit me especially if in the future i decide to go fx i’d already have a nice lens. does this sound about right?