jackyboyboy
New Member
Dun go for 27-70 F2.8 if you not moving to FX soon. Funny range for DX I felt.
24-70 f2.8 on D7k ... is it waste of money?
- Thread starter bethpapa74
- Start date
r0n1n
Senior Member
i noticed that most replies were "get the 24-70 if you plan to upgrade to FF". 24-70 is wider on FX and longer on DX, aside from these, what else is the advantage of using 24-70 using FX? will the IQ be different? I don't think so. I believe you can still bring out the best out of this lens whether its 24-70 on FX or 36-105 on DX. as dd123 mentioned, its not the tools but the skills.
read the TS post lah. He said he is NOT going to upgrade to FX.....
Actually the 24-70mm is such a good lens because of it edge performance. Most lens can do pretty well at the center, even cheap third party ones. One of the reason why we pay for premium lens like nikon 24-70mm or 14-24mm is the edge performance. Cheaper alternatives usually have much poorer edge performance.
But if you are going to use the lens on DX, the difference between the nikon and cheaper versions is not big as all you see in the frame is center performance. Of course still have difference lah but it is much less than if you use it on FX.
I am pleased with the photographs taken using 24-70 on my DX camera. The main plus point is the ability to deliver clean and sharp images even at its wide open aperture of F2.8 and in my opinion, pleasant bokeh. The pleasant bokeh and good images at F2.8 aperture allow me to capture indoor event images with subject or person isolated from any distracting background. So, it is not a waste of money when the lens can be put to good use.
The large hood size, overall large diameter of the lens and the long length of the lens are the downside of the lens, in addition to the weight of the lens.
The large hood size, overall large diameter of the lens and the long length of the lens are the downside of the lens, in addition to the weight of the lens.
TheChef
Senior Member
Yes, 80-400VR is an FX lens, but it can still be used on DX body. As for image quality, I find 80-400VR better than 70-300VR. Very sharp wide open at 400mm. The 70-300VR is a bit soft wide open at 300mm. Actually 70-300VR is also an FX lens. As for 55-200VR, it is a very good lens and I believe that it is underpriced.
Last edited:
s1221ljc
Senior Member
Hi, whether the lens is a waste depends on what you do with it & whether you really use it. If its for the itch & for the show, definitely. Do you really need the extra 1-2 stops faster lens speed, will it really improve the type of photographs you taking? Will the lens stay in the dry box as it is too bulky & heavy to be practical in those photo situations you find yourself constantly in? Only you can answer these.
Whilst the lens is clearly superior in build & IQ quality, the build is more for professionals who use it day in day in under tough & punishing conditions. The excellent IQ goes all the way to the edges, but center wise, I say one cant really tell the difference if a picture is taken with this or that lens. This particulary on DX where the capabilities at the edge are not optimised. But of course if you have the means & whether it's needs or wants doesnt matter, go ahead with the indulgence. Its a great lens though nothing's perfect.
I feel that for the money (total cost <$4.5K> D7000+24-70) I did rather get the D700 & couple of primes, non-pro zooms & the IQ would be better imho. Put a 85mm f1.8 on a D700 or even your D7000 & compare with the 24-70 f2.8 at the long end & judge for yourself whether the high price you pay is worth it... Can also compare a older humble Nikon 24-85 f3.5-4.5 (can get at $400 bnib) to the 24-70 f2.8 too to see where the difference(s) lie for the price. Nothing like seeing it for yourself as your purpose & satisfaction is all that matters.
If you looked at the B&S past week, you will see so very many of this 24-70 f2.8 lens put on sale. Can think of the reasons why??? Some swear by it, others realise there are "better" &/or cheaper alternatives/combinations. Also, just saw some studio model shots taken with the D7000 & modest 50mm f1.8 lens, look fantastic, even those with D700 & ex lens around eyes open & admire
This is just based on my experiences & opinion.... Whichever lens you choose, enjoy
Last edited:
Sgdevilzz
Senior Member
In 5 years time yes. But then again i can't just confirm. I'm just suggesting to TS IF he is going to upgrade.
Last edited:
If you looked at the B&S past week, you will see so very many of this 24-70 f2.8 lens put on sale. Can think of the reasons why??? Some swear by it, others realise there are "better" &/or cheaper alternatives/combinations. Also, just saw some studio model shots taken with the D7000 & modest 50mm f1.8 lens, look fantastic, even those with D700 & ex lens around eyes open & admire
one thing you should note about the nikon 24-70mm, there are reports that the earlier batches has reliability issues. Notably from lensrental.com which catalog which of their lens has the most problems.
"The Nikon 24-70, which gave us a horrible time with sticking zoom barrels when it was first introduced, now is virtually trouble free. We’ve eliminated the web-page warnings on all of those lenses. (I probably should point out again that we turn our lenses over pretty frequently, and in all three cases over half of our current copies were purchased in the last 6 months.)"
So beware if you are buying the 24-70mm 2nd hand.
baggiolee
Senior Member
Wrong. I can assure u the difference of the center performance is huge. but of course its performance can only be fully optimize using FX body.
Last edited:
lankyal
Senior Member
I think TS has made up his mind and is upgrading to FX to pair the 24-70.....
Saw his thread selling his gear in BnS...
Last edited:
bethpapa74
Senior Member
*sign*
If i managed to sell my mint conditioned d7k set off .. then i will go down John3:16 to get d700+(24-70) already.
*sign*
Being offered .. d700=$3060 (24-70)=$2550
I hope my hard earned money is well spent this time ...
ya. Because buy that time never think properly. Now lose money.
Brand new D7k kit with freebies new is now 1950. I was recently offered one brand new set with freebies for under 1900 too. Used set at most can sell 1800 only. And 35/1.8 used can only really sell for 300 because a brand new one is selling for $326.
Last edited:
What happened to your 10-24? That one cannot be used on FX u know.
r0n1n
Senior Member
I am comparing the lens' performance on both DX and FX body. so what else can the 24-70 lens perform on FX that it can't do on DX? :dunno:
Similar threads
