Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 VR price tag??

4 years 2 months ago #476010 by Flying Pig
$2400??  this is nearly at $700 price hike over the non VR 24-70mm.  Anyone fork out the extra cash for this lens yet? 

www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1175033-R..._24_70mm_f_2_8e.html

What's your feelings on the lens?


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
4 years 2 months ago #476026 by effron
Not me, I'm good with the older, non VR version....

Why so serious?
Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
4 years 2 months ago #476031 by JeremyS
I believe it would be a good purchase... the old 24-70 is pushing 9 years old and has older technology inside of it. The new 24-70 not only has VR but also an E notation, indicating an electromagnetic diaphragm which ensures quality with exposure even under conditions of high speed photos. On top of that, the competition's 24-70's are newer technology that top the old 24-70 in many ways. 

For the extra price it may not be 100% worth it, but if you are deciding between the new vs the old nikon 24-70, the new one blows away the older one. if you want the old one or the new one is too expensive, look at the tamron 24-70. 


Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
4 years 2 months ago #476032 by Screamin Scott
IMHO, most of these hyper expensive fast zooms are overkill for most shooters. Personally, I'll settle for slightly older technology at a much reduced price, as they were still computer designed lenses.. I sure don't need VR on a lens that only goes to 70mm & much of the other "improvements" are minimal compared to what you have to pay for the. As for the differences being minimal, most review sites like DXO Mark bench test their lenses & real world shooting will negate many of the improvements as compared to older tech.

Scott Ditzel Photography

www.flickr.com/photos/screaminscott/

Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
4 years 2 months ago #476153 by Peter Nunez

Takennnn wrote: I believe it would be a good purchase... the old 24-70 is pushing 9 years old and has older technology inside of it. The new 24-70 not only has VR but also an E notation, indicating an electromagnetic diaphragm which ensures quality with exposure even under conditions of high speed photos. On top of that, the competition's 24-70's are newer technology that top the old 24-70 in many ways. 

For the extra price it may not be 100% worth it, but if you are deciding between the new vs the old nikon 24-70, the new one blows away the older one. if you want the old one or the new one is too expensive, look at the tamron 24-70. 



Anyone else just amazed when you look at where technology has gone in recent years.  Manufactures are really doing what they can to close what ever gaps they can on people not taking good photos.  Now granted there are some skills that regardless of what camera or lens you have, if you don't have it, you don't have it.  Still amazing. 

As for me, older gear is just fine.  


Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
4 years 2 months ago #476192 by Joves

Screamin Scott wrote: IMHO, most of these hyper expensive fast zooms are overkill for most shooters. Personally, I'll settle for slightly older technology at a much reduced price, as they were still computer designed lenses.. I sure don't need VR on a lens that only goes to 70mm & much of the other "improvements" are minimal compared to what you have to pay for the. As for the differences being minimal, most review sites like DXO Mark bench test their lenses & real world shooting will negate many of the improvements as compared to older tech.

:agree:
Yeah I never saw much use of VR on anything shorter than 105mm myself. Good technique trumps technology any day of the week. The only lens that I would even think of getting the newer version would be my 80-400, and that is only for the focusing motor over the screw drive. It seems that small improvements are costing a lot more. Also I love the little timer trying to get you to buy now for expedited shipping.


Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484298 by Scotty
It's just a tad sharper and a lot longers and heavier than the one it replaced. 

I'm disappointed in it but to each their own.

When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.

Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484362 by effron

Scotty wrote: It's just a tad sharper and a lot longers and heavier than the one it replaced. 

I'm disappointed in it but to each their own.


Yeah, the original weighs quite enough.......

Why so serious?
Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484395 by Scotty

effron wrote:

Scotty wrote: It's just a tad sharper and a lot longers and heavier than the one it replaced. 

I'm disappointed in it but to each their own.


Yeah, the original weighs quite enough.......


You're telling me. Heavily considering switching over the new 24-120 f/4

When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.

Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484425 by effron
I shot a small low key wedding over the weekend, used the D700 and 24-70 mostly....for the reception I grabbed the D800 and slapped on a 50 f/1.8 for some back and neck relief......(glad I don't do those events for a living these days. The phone camera shooters were a nightmare!):angry:

Why so serious?
Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484500 by Don Fischer
Speaking of "a tad sharper", how sharp is sharp enough? I strongly suspect that photo's we got with camera's many years ago were sharper than could be detected with the human eye.


Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484517 by effron
The not oft used term is "acceptably" sharp.

Why so serious?
Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484535 by Scotty

Don Fischer wrote: Speaking of "a tad sharper", how sharp is sharp enough? I strongly suspect that photo's we got with camera's many years ago were sharper than could be detected with the human eye.


Look up at a Nikon 200mm F/2.0.   We still have ways to go, or some of the Zeiss lenses.

When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.

Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484542 by Stealthy Ninja
Sell it all and go Fuji

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,
3 years 11 months ago #484544 by Scotty

Stealthy Ninja wrote: Sell it all and go Fuji


They need to start paying you.

When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.

Photo Comments

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

,

802.3K

205K

1.62M

  • Facebook

    802,251 / Likes

  • Twitter

    205,000 / Followers

  • Google+

    1,620,816 / Followers

Latest Reviews

In the Canon 5D Mark III vs Canon 1D Mark IV battle, which of these older cameras is right for you? Get all the details on these oldies but goodies in this comparison review.

May 27, 2020

The Fujifilm X-T4 was released just a couple of months ago and represents a nice update to the X-T3. In this Fujifilm X-T4 review, we'll discuss specs, features, build, handling, and more.

May 20, 2020

Not sure if the Canon 5Ds R is right for you in 2020? Let us help you decide with this detailed Canon 5Ds R review.

May 20, 2020

Is the Fujifilm GFX 50S medium format camera the right choice for you? Find out in this quick review of its specs, build quality, video capabilities, and more.

May 18, 2020

Forum Top Posters

Latest Articles

In this ball head buying guide, learn about the specs and features of some of the top ball heads of 2020.

Jun 01, 2020

There are many different benefits of lens filters for photography. You can control exposure. You can also control glare. Get the scoop on other benefits in this guide.

Jun 01, 2020

There are many reasons why you should print on metal, including the durability and uniqueness of metal prints, as well as all the options you have for customizing your print.

May 29, 2020

Razer has unleashed the 2020 version of their Blade 15 Studio, and it is an incredible machine with the power visual creatives need.

May 29, 2020

To learn nude photography - particularly artistic nude photography - requires you to commit yourself to artistic thinking and the process of taking a well thought out image.

May 29, 2020

Taking self-portraits requires the right gear and the right approach. Get critical portrait photography tips in this quick how-to guide.

May 28, 2020

Investing in right lights for YouTube video production is one of the best things you can do to improve the quality of your videos. Which right lights are right for you though? Find out in this buyer's guide!

May 28, 2020

Canvas or paper prints can be a nice addition to your home, but each one has distinct advantages and disadvantages that are helpful to know before you buy.

May 27, 2020