Tamron 24-70 VC on a D7100?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JJ!
  • Start date Start date
JJ!

JJ!

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,822
Edit My Images
No
Anyone tried the new 24-70 on a crop sensor? I do intend to get a wide angle at a later date, but was looking in to getting a fast zoom to start me off.

Want something for possible indoor equestrian (I will be close to the action) and general all round walkabout.

I was going to get the 16-85 and 70-300, but now thinking of blowing my entire budget on a nice fast zoom.
 
I did look at that option, but I intend to get a 70-200 or 70-300 and not sure if I will miss the 50-70 range.

Or in the real world is that not a big deal?

Just noticed the price difference! Maybe I can live with losing the 50-70!
 
Last edited:
Yeah, thats why I suggested it lol. I doubt you would miss that odd 20mm and its better at the wider end for a crop camera.
 
Last edited:
The 50-70 gap is one or two steps so no real problem, the wider end is much more valuable imo/e.
 
Ahh, thanks for the tips! I'm guessing the 17-50 is a better overall lens that the 16-85 Nikon in the 17-50 range?
 
The 17-50 is constant F2.8 and very sharp, IMO a better lens but not as versatile, but that doesnt matter as you said youll be buying a 70-?
 
twist said:
The 17-50 is constant F2.8 and very sharp, IMO a better lens but not as versatile, but that doesnt matter as you said youll be buying a 70-?
Click to expand...

Yep, will probably get the 70-300 VC from Tamron if i go for the 17-50 and save up for a contast f2.8 70-200.

It was either that combo or the 16-85 & 70-300 Nikon versions, but having a f2.8 lens to start with is quite appealin.
 
The question no ones asked is do you shoot wide much?

I don't so a 24-70 VC (or a 24-120 VR which is similar money but only f4) would make good sense and mean no DX only glass if you're eyeing up a FX camera body. The D700 and D3 are starting to get to be quite good value now, I saw a D3 for £800 today.

Basically spend the money where you will use it most. I shoot long more then wide so I am about to invest in a good long lens but will probably cheap out a bit at the wide to standard range.
 
Wide = not very often.

More portraits and sports. Just want good IQ which I can use in low light.
 
Budget allows - but that would be it for now!

If I got the 17-50 I would get the 70-300, but I can save for that if I go for the 24-70.

Big decision that I dont want to get wrong!
 
Not yet.. awaiting lens decision beforehand.
 
If I were you and you are after ultimate quality Id consider a used D800 and a 24-70 vc.
 
Trouble is, this is a present from the wife from some inheritance money and she wants to get new with warranty.
 
You could get used from a reputable dealer with 6-12 months warranty.
 
why not just buy the D7000 and use the money you saved (350 GBP pound cheaper + a 100GBP cashback from nikon) for a 17-50 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8?
 
Last edited:
If you are considering FX in the future or can stretch the budget I would get the 24-70 VC. The VC is great and it can be had for £800 with a proper 5 year warranty from SRS Microsystems on eBay. Just keep in mind the 82mm filter thread, as at that size filters get expensive and as others have said spend the money where you need it. For me it’s a great every day lens that spend a lot of time on my camera.
 
TBH, if it were a choice of £1k and under new Id just go for the D7000 and spend the rest on lenses instead of a D7100, as suggested. Catch is if you want a new 70-200 2.8 its gonna cost you esp for a VR2.

This should add up okay....

D7k - 530
24-70 VC - 800
Sigma 70-200 OS - 830

vs

D7100 - 1k
24-70 VC - 800
Tamron 70-200 - 550
 
Last edited:
twist said:
This should add up okay....

D7k - 530
24-70 VC - 800
Sigma 70-200 OS - 830
Click to expand...

This looks really good, you could even have the Nikkor 70-200 f4 for just a bit more for a lighter/sharper lens if you dont need the 2.8-4 range
 
The extra reach on the 24-70 is appealing, but the price is a concern. I guess you get what you pay for.

Anybody know how the IQ on the 17-50 compares?
 
Yeah, could do with pretty snappy focus. Thinking about it, 50 is probably a tad too short for my liking.
 
Also.. Will the weight of the 24-70 be unbalanced in the D7100 or be pretty good match?
 
Remember that you can crop an image taken at 50mm to make it appear like a 70mm shot but there's nothing you can do to make 24mm look like 17mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top