Nikkor 24mm 2.8 prime or 24-70 2.8

D

devitt

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,407
Name
Karl
Edit My Images
Yes
Evening all,

I am saving for a Nikon 24-70 2.8 but when shooting landscapes I find myself using the 24mm end of my 18-70 kit lens. The question is, what would produce better results of the 24mm prime or the 24-70 2.8 used at 24mm? I know there is a huge price difference but many/most say primes are better than any zoom. So is this still the case here?

Any help and advice appreciated:thumbs:
 
Remember, you will be stopping it down for landscapes too, so performance may be even closer :)
 
purpleclouds said:
Remember, you will be stopping it down for landscapes too, so performance may be even closer :)
Click to expand...

This is what I am thinking. A hard call for me but hopefully there are a couple out there who have experienced both lenses.
 
I have a selection of prime as well as the 24-70 and I would say that the 24-70 is a better buy. For the length, it is now the best lens I have owned after the Canon L version.

Nikon themselves advise that the 24-70 now finally outperforms a prime.

Hope this helps.

An example of what the 24-70 does for me....

2501854589_e32639641d.jpg
 
Thanks a lot Diego interesting info there and many thanks for the picture example:thumbs:

It will be going on my D80 so I presume it will still yield great results even though its no D3 right?
 
You get better results with the 24mm AF-D.

Try both lens at 24mm and look at the edge performance (need to try this on full frame, NOT DX)
 
puddleduck said:
You get better results with the 24mm AF-D.

Try both lens at 24mm and look at the edge performance (need to try this on full frame, NOT DX)
Click to expand...

Many thanks puddleduck, I am swaying more towards the prime at this stage due to size and weight issues when carrying it around (a lot of hiking).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top