Which 24-70mm would you recommend?

S

Stefana Maria

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6
Name
STEFANA BURSUC
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys,
So I have a nikon d750 and I am looking for a 24 70 mm. I'd use it for small events like baptisms, kids parties, restaurant parties. I wouldn't want to pay 1800€ for a nikon, since I don't do events very often so I'd appreciate some advise about alternative 24 70 lenses.
Thank you
 
Hi Stefana,

I have owned a couple of Tamron SP AF ASPHERICAL XR Di LD IF 28-75mm 1:2.8 MACRO lenses in the past that were very sharp and had good image quality. Both were purchased used and performed well.

I also owned a AF-S Nikkor 24-74mm 1:2.8G ED which was epically sharp but rather heavy and expensive.

Hope that helps :)
 
Maybe this will help?

Redirect Notice

www.google.co.uk

If you don’t need the f2.8 then the 24-120mm f4 is well worth considering, sharpness is similar to the 24-70mm f2.8.
 
The following 3rd party lens manufacturers have a 24-70mm, Sigma, Tamron and you might find a discontinued Tokina one.
 
Hi

I have had the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and was not happy with it even after being serviced by Tamron. I have since bought a used Nikon 24-70 2.8 the non vr version and am very happy with it on my D750.
 
wilt said:
The Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 (non VR) can be had for very reasonable money second hand.
They are a work horse of a lens and was my most used lens in F-mount.
MPB have plenty around the £500 mark.
Click to expand...
Great suggestion and you are spot on, the non VR is still a stunning lens.
 
snerkler said:
Maybe this will help?

Redirect Notice

www.google.co.uk

If you don’t need the f2.8 then the 24-120mm f4 is well worth considering, sharpness is similar to the 24-70mm f2.8.
Click to expand...

I love my 24-120 f/4 - it's never off my D750 ... unless the Sigma 150-600 is fitted, of course :)
 
I'd suggest the used market and go for one of the 24-70 Nikkors, Prices more affordable as most new buyers are getting 'Z's thus enriching the used market with G (no-VR) or E (VR) lenses.

If your budget doesn't extend to the 24-70 then the 24-120 f4 is a great alternative (just don't fall for the 24-120 f3.5-f5.6, just don't).
 
inkiboo said:
Great suggestion and you are spot on, the non VR is still a stunning lens.
Click to expand...

If you can get a nice one for £500 I'd say it is worth that.

I had one and ran it for 6 years. It was a workhorse, dependable and reliable.

A few things I didn't like.

Extending barrel zoom - it does suck in sensor dirt.

Centre to edge sharpness. Good in the middle at all FL's. Excellent all over in the mid range (35-62mm) seemed a sweet spot for it, abysmal in the sides below 30mm and beyond 62mm, abysmal in the crop the image square sense of abysmal and that was at F11.

What I did like

The field of view it offered.
The performance at F5.6 was epic (at certain FLs) actually unlike an F4 zoom which could still be a bit smeary in the edges)
AF performance
Colour rendition. It just rendered nicely.
Flare resistance. Shot loads of lit up buildings with it - never any ugly flare spots. Good coatings on the lens for sure.
Overall build quality. It was nice and reassuringly solid feeling.
 
I've been a Nikon shooter for some time and I have almost exclusively bought Nikon lens - maybe I'm 3rd Party "blind".

If you buy a 3rd Party lens you will always think that you should have bought the Nikon and question your shots, just my feelings.
 
BillN_33 said:
I've been a Nikon shooter for some time and I have almost exclusively bought Nikon lens - maybe I'm 3rd Party "blind".

If you buy a 3rd Party lens you will always think that you should have bought the Nikon and question your shots, just my feelings.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of 3rd party lenses that give native a good run for their money (y).

I’ve never felt the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 was/is a stellar lens optically, especially at it’s RRP. IQ is very good, just not maybe as good as you would expect given the price tag. That being said, if you can pick a good one up for £500 as mentioned above then it’s a bargain.
 
I've the 24-70 non-VR (also a D750 user) and found it fine, really good at times. When it wasn't good I always put it down to user incompetence... But the 24-85 VR I had was a close match for a lot less money, but with more distortion at the wide end. My current 'do-it-all' lens is a Tamron 35-150 which again matches the Nikon for quality when I use it well.

BillN_33 said:
If you buy a 3rd Party lens you will always think that you should have bought the Nikon and question your shots, just my feelings.
Click to expand...

What if Nikon don't make a lens of the focal length/zoom range you need but another manufacturer does? :)
 
Ed Sutton said:
I've the 24-70 non-VR (also a D750 user) and found it fine, really good at times. When it wasn't good I always put it down to user incompetence... But the 24-85 VR I had was a close match for a lot less money, but with more distortion at the wide end. My current 'do-it-all' lens is a Tamron 35-150 which again matches the Nikon for quality when I use it well.



What if Nikon don't make a lens of the focal length/zoom range you need but another manufacturer does? :)
Click to expand...

then buy one from the other manufacturer, but I have not needed a focal length with my DSLRs that Nikon does not make - as I said "just my feelings"
 
If you get a used Pro one for a very good price, it will likely sell for the simular later on.

For example, get a mint 70-200 VR 2 for £900 and in 5 years it will not devalue much.

Sadly we wont be picking those up for £500 any time soon lol. i wish
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top