Nikon 24-70 f2.8(ish) advice

S

ssray

Suspended / Banned
Messages
182
Name
Ray
Edit My Images
Yes
Morning,

As I have found out that a genuine nikon 24-70 will be out of range, i have been looking on that evilbay

Sigma hsm`s seem to be going a bit silly too, so
moving onto tamron.... what is the diffrence between a tamron af-d sp xr 28/75 2.8di or a xr di ld(£239) or a tamron sp af 28/75 xr di ld(£359) or tokina At-x pro sv Af 28-70 f2.8 (£260)
which would I be the better lens, this would mean a 50 1.8 at the same time and a possible upgrade in the future
Ta
Ray
 
Slightly cheaper option to the 24-70 is the Nikon AFS 28-70mm.. £600-700.
Can't comment on the Tamrons..
 
I comment on the others but the Nikon f/2.8 is sublime. It's robust, the optical quality is excellent and it will last years but you would expect that from a professional lens. It will probably out-live your camera !
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Nikon 35-70 f2.8 is a very good alternative if you can cope with no 24-35mm ... it was the predecessor to the 28-70 f2.8 and will be in your price range :)
 
I cannot comment on the sigma or tamron but the Nikkor one is lovely but I paid £1250 new UK. Used prices are cheaper but at the prices quoted for the Tamron and Tokina you can't go wrong really. They'll be fine.
 
tamron do a 24-70 VC which is very well respected. it's more or less close to the canon version but with stabilisation.
I can't comment on the nikon from experience but reviews are very positive.
 
I say save for the Nikon too, I had a Tamron for a while but it went wrong and after renting a Nikon decided that I was better off waiting till I could afford it!
 
I would 100% save for the Nikon - My feeling towards it is that why spend money (say £300) on a lens that you're only going to want to change for the Nikon further down the line anyway? That could be £300 towards your £800 Nikon 24-70mm!

I was in the same situation and bought a mint condition secondhand Nikon 24-70mm from Camera Jungle for £800 and I couldn't be happier with it.
 
Last edited:
You lot are not helping!!!!
I have purchased a tamron from the classifieds, will have to save for the nikon
thanks
Ray
 
Nikon 24-70 is expensive. As most have posted states they have gone straight to Nikon and not tried other variants. I have had sigma 24-70 hsm tokina 28-70, and now the Nikon 28-70. Out of the three the Nikon version is probably the best because it offers 77mm filter ring as all my filters are 77mm as well as silent wave focus motor. Optically I don't think there are a lot to differentiate. And if you go by some of the reviews of 24-70 when compared with Nikon 28-70 there are marginal gain in optical performance..namely flare control and contrast in direct lighting. All of which can be corrected or improved and avoided.
 
Had a Sigma for years.Great lens!. By luck ik could buy a like new 2.8 28-70 Nikon for 500 euro.
By far that was my lucky day for years!
 
gramps said:
Nikon 35-70 f2.8 is a very good alternative if you can cope with no 24-35mm ... it was the predecessor to the 28-70 f2.8 and will be in your price range :)
Click to expand...
Got to agree with this

I tried a couple of mid zooms from non Nikon sources. Not happy with any of them. Had a Tamron that was soft all down one side. Hopeless.
Settled on the Nikon 35-70. Sharp and heavy. Ok, don't shoot into the sun. Already have a 16-35f/4 , so I have to change lenses if I want to go wider that 35mm. But a much cheaper option. Last forever, as they have no AF motor in them either.
 
Last edited:
My mrs bought my nikon 24-70 from VERY interest free for 12 months. Its like saving in reverse
 
Tamron had a dreadful reputation in the 80s both on build quality and optics. They were considered to be the 'Skodas' of the lens world back then. I'm pleased to see that their quality and performance has improved significantly since then.
 
I always thought I wanted a Nikon 24-70. I bought a "stop gap" tamron 28-75 for 200 quid. No desire or need to upgrade. It's my workhorse lens, sharp and snappy in the focus. A side benefit is that it's much lighter too!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top