Reading mode: Light Dark

I own and love the 24-70mm but sometimes it's too large/heavy...good walkaround lens?

Go to last post
photonerdcom said:
I'm blind as a bat without my glasses...and I don't trust my eyes to manually focus.

Yes...it's a must!
--
8^D
Click to expand...
You can trust the green dot to let you know you are focused.

BTW - I own both Nikon 24-70 & Tamron 28-75. I often use the Tamron to walk around with becuse of its size and weight. But, if I want to get serious the Nikon 24-70 is nicer
 
That's right, and the way it works is that you raise your hand to the focusing ring and turn it until the image is in focus. Then you depress the shutter release. Finally, you wipe the sweat away from your forehead, caused by the effort exerted (optional).

The reason you might want to do this is shown in, for example, the MTF data in the reviews I posted.
photonerdcom said:
It's 2009 right?

--
8^D
Click to expand...
--
My photos:
http://nickburton.smugmug.com/
 
I want the equipment to help me, and get the heck out of my way...not create more work and leave more room for me to mess up.

--
8^D
 
I don't want to seem to bash Tamron since I don't have first hand experience, but a friend of mine initially loved the Tamron 28-75 for the color and contrast, until of course, the lens failed to contact properly due to "third-party" QC or cheap component warping.

It would occur often enough that he end up trading for a Nikkor 16-85 and happy ever since. Thom mentions the same thing with the Tamron 28-300.
Petruska said:
I bought a new 28-75 with built-in-motor last Tuesday and found it slow focusing, so I bought the same lens off Ebay with the screw drive to compare, arrived this Monday. Yes the screw drive focuses faster. The amazing thing was that the two lenses are clones of each other, IQ same, no different color casts, etc.

This is what I see at F2.8.....

D700, shot in RAW, converted to JPG, was an 8 X 10 chart, used internal flash, -1.0EV due to being close with flash, no PP.

Original.....

This is sharp, I'm a very happy owner. At F3.5 and up it's sharp, sharp.

I'm not knocking the Nikon 24-70, but for the hobbiest, at 1/5th the cost, smaller size, lighter weight, this is a winner!

I need to compare this lens to my Nikon 85/F1.4 and 50/F1.4 but I doubt that there is going to be any difference.

I have 4 Tamron lenses and 11 Nikon lenses and these Tamrons are not bad at all for the price.......
Click to expand...
 
My 28-70/2.8 is terrific for a wedding reception and in the studio, but it gathers dust between bookings. It's just too large for casual use. My choice for a d700 walk-around lens is the 60/2.8 micro. The new AF-S version is sharp, contrasty, and performs well at any distance. That makes it useful for everything from

closeups...



to portraits...



to architecture.



I also tuck a tiny 24/2.8 in my pocket, just in case I run into a scene that calls for an ultra wide.



The 24 + 60 combo is modestly priced, lightweight, and fun to use. Imho.

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Event Photographer

Galleries at fdrphoto.smugmug.com
 
Uncle Frank said:
My 28-70/2.8 is terrific for a wedding reception and in the studio, but it gathers dust between bookings. It's just too large for casual use. My choice for a d700 walk-around lens is the 60/2.8 micro. The new AF-S version is sharp, contrasty, and performs well at any distance. That makes it useful for everything from
Click to expand...
Nice shots, Frank.

My 24-70 is doing the same. The 50 is my choice for walk-around.

Dominic
 
What is it with people who feel they need to belittle stuff they themselves profess not to understand?

And why are you telling me what you want? Like I care?
photonerdcom said:
I want the equipment to help me, and get the heck out of my way...not create more work and leave more room for me to mess up.

--
8^D
Click to expand...
--
My photos:
http://nickburton.smugmug.com/
 
Apollo18 said:
And why are you telling me what you want? Like I care?
Click to expand...
Then why are you offering gratuitous advice on his thread?

First you suggest a MF lens, and then opine that the green dot is an adequate substitute for good eyesight. It isn't. Then you put him down cause he doesn't understand MTF data, which is a seriously poor way to pick a lens anyway. Have you ever seen Bjorn Rorslett cite MTF data?

The way it works is someone asks a question, and those who can try to help him out. Were you trying to be helpful?

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Event Photographer

Galleries at fdrphoto.smugmug.com
 
I didn't even mention the green dot. I'm sure he understands the MTF, and didn't suggest otherwise.

Yes, I was trying to be helpful by suggesting that if AF is not essential to him, then there are some nice MF options out there. A "no thanks" would have been nice, but insetad I got a "duh, whatever".

What are you talking about?
Uncle Frank said:
Apollo18 said:
And why are you telling me what you want? Like I care?
Click to expand...
Then why are you offering gratuitous advice on his thread?

First you suggest a MF lens, and then opine that the green dot is an adequate substitute for good eyesight. It isn't. Then you put him down cause he doesn't understand MTF data, which is a seriously poor way to pick a lens anyway. Have you ever seen Bjorn Rorslett cite MTF data?

The way it works is someone asks a question, and those who can try to help him out. Were you trying to be helpful?

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Event Photographer

Galleries at fdrphoto.smugmug.com
Click to expand...
--
My photos:
http://nickburton.smugmug.com/
 
This is the post where you lost it. A simple no thank you would have been better.

Owning a very expensive lens like the 24-70 is not proof that you have any class- although I once again fell for the trap thinking you probably had lots since you owned it.

I don't like manual focus either but would not have gone the direction you did in this thread. Show a little more class next time and say no thanks or give a good reason like how the green dot doesn't help you enough (which is my problem, too.)

Due to the lack of good will and the bad taste I've got in my mouth I've lost interest in reading this thread further. Here's to success with your new lens and hope for a new refreshing attitude as you post further.

Guy Moscoso
photonerdcom said:
It's 2009 right?

--
8^D
Click to expand...
 
The MTF charts are a very valuable asset for judging a lens' optical quality, once you understand how the math behind the MTF charts works you will agree with me.

The OP might not be interested in learning about MTF charts, but replying with MTF data??? pfffffffft - whatever - seriously I never understood that stuff is somewhat of a borderline flame.
Uncle Frank said:
Apollo18 said:
And why are you telling me what you want? Like I care?
Click to expand...
Then why are you offering gratuitous advice on his thread?

First you suggest a MF lens, and then opine that the green dot is an adequate substitute for good eyesight. It isn't. Then you put him down cause he doesn't understand MTF data, which is a seriously poor way to pick a lens anyway. Have you ever seen Bjorn Rorslett cite MTF data?

The way it works is someone asks a question, and those who can try to help him out. Were you trying to be helpful?

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Event Photographer

Galleries at fdrphoto.smugmug.com
Click to expand...
--
http://haf.cc
 
Seriously, mostly everyone here understands that photography is supposed to be fun and an art form. I'm not a pro, and try to learn as much as I can from real pros.

Everything I have ever read from real pros in the field, listened to, or studied, always mention similar things:

i.e. let the equipment help you and get out of your way (not...spend way too much on a snobby piece of glass that does less - i.e. manual focus), none mention MTF curves and how to pick a lens mathematically, and why is a person looked down upon if they can afford a lens that's nice optically and fun to use (i.e. 24-70mm)?

--
8^D
 
Congratulations. I like mine a lot. I wish it focused just a tad faster, but what lens is perfect.

I'm starting to sound like an old record (repeating all the time) but... If you have a prett solid camera, I find the Black Rapid strap makes it very easy to carry a large lens on a camera all day. I've used the strap with a D3 and a 28-70 as well as a D3 and a 70-200. In both cases it made carrying this heavy rig for ten hours very easy while keepng the camera very accessible.
 
I still think you were snotty when someone suggested a MF lens you answer with

Hey it's 2009!

then continued with other snotty posts. I think you should answer with "I don't like or can't use MF lenses" but you answered in a snotty way. Yes I'm judging you. I think you were snotty.

Take it or leave it. (I'm pretty sure you'll leave it.)

Guy Moscoso
photonerdcom said:
Seriously, mostly everyone here understands that photography is supposed to be fun and an art form. I'm not a pro, and try to learn as much as I can from real pros.

Everything I have ever read from real pros in the field, listened to, or studied, always mention similar things:

i.e. let the equipment help you and get out of your way (not...spend way too much on a snobby piece of glass that does less - i.e. manual focus), none mention MTF curves and how to pick a lens mathematically, and why is a person looked down upon if they can afford a lens that's nice optically and fun to use (i.e. 24-70mm)?

--
8^D
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top