Top Nikon lens comparison (14-24, 24, 24-70 2.8, 50 1.4, 28-300, 70-300, 70-200,105))

Started Sep 18, 2012 | Discussions thread
Arash31
Regular MemberPosts: 150
Like?
Re: Top Nikon lens comparison (14-24, 24, 24-70 2.8, 50 1.4, 28-300, 70-300, 70-200,1
In reply to Arash31, Sep 23, 2012

As i use this more and when i review the result, it's too bad that the 24-70 wide open at 2.8 is not a great performer...still not too bad, but I was hoping for a better gap for the price/weight of this lens. To really get the 24-70 to perform I need to stop down as others have also mentioned which then wouldn't make it as great of a lens in low light without flash (indoor). I am not aware of any other mid range zoom that could do better though!

Now I repeated these tests at the widest Aperture available....so in the case of the 2.8 lenses it would be 2.8....and the rest 4.5-5.6

@ 24mm
Nikon 24 1.4: A+ (2.8)
Nikon 14-24 2.8: A- (2.8)
Nikon 24-70: B (2.8)

@ 28mm
Nikon 24-70: B+ A-
Nikon 28-300: C-

@ 35mm
Nikon 24-70: B-
Nikon 28-300: C-

@ 50mm

Nikon 50 1.4 @ 2.8: B+
Nikon 50 1.4 @ 1.4: B-
Nikon 28-300 @ 4.5: C+
Nikon 24-70 @ 2.8: B

@ 70mm
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VRII @ 2.8: A+
Nikon 24-70 @ 2.8: A
Nikon 28-300 @ 5: A-
Nikon 70-300 VR @ 4.5: A-

@105mm
Nikon 105 2.8 @ 2.8: A+
Nikon 28-300 @ 5.3: A-
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VRII @ 2.8: A
Nikon 70-300 VR @ 4.5: B+

@200mm
Nikon 70-200 VRII @ 2.8: A+
Nikon 28-300 @ 5.6: A-
Nikon 70-300 VR @ 5.3: A-

@300mm (the 28-300 does not actually give you a full 300...is more like 270)
Nikon 28-300: B
Nikon 70-300 VR: B

So in conclusion....The 24 1.4, 105 2.8 VR and the 70-200 VRII are consistently producing the top results followed closely by the Nikon 14-24. The 24-70 did pretty well at 2.8 compared to the other ones; however, at F8 the difference was not as significant but still sharper.

The 28-300 as expected is an ok lens; however no match for the other lenses until you get to above 50-200ish range. It doesn't give a full 300 though.

The 70-300 I was surprised. I thought i had a sharp copy; however, in most cases the IQ was either the same or below the 28-300. So other than the fact that it gives me slightly more tele at 300, I am not sure what the benefit is...although again I haven't tested auto focus and it does tend to have slightly a wider aperture.

The 50mm 1.4 prime was decent but not a match for the 24mm or the 70-200 VRII or the 105 2.8 VR.

Lastly, I had already tested the 28-300 against the 18-200 VR on a D7000 DX body and the results were in favor of the 28-300. The only issue with this lens is that it is poor at 28mm especially wide open....it's only around 50mm that it turns around.

Hope this comparison was helpful.

Cheers!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow