Next best lens to Nikkor 24-70mm?

28-70mm lens great glass sharp sharp sharp.... I also have the 14-24mm lens another sharp lens and the 70-200mm Vr II. Couldn't pay $800 to $1000 more for 4mm more for the 24-70mm lens. I've tried the 24-70mm some say it's a little sharper than the 28-70mm Not for me, can't see it I've tried. The 28-70mm is a little heavyer, but it's ok I don't ware it around my neck tourist style. So weights not a problem plus I go to the gym. Ha....

You might want to check out the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8. Back before the 28-70 this was Nikon's pro quality mid range zoom. the range is a bit limited, but it is still an excellent lens and it is built like a tank. You can pick one up in excellent + condition for KEH.com for $546 - which I think is one of the best deals you will ever find in a Nikon f/2.8 zoom

here is a link

http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NA07009035682N?r=FE

--
My kit - D200, 10.5mm f/2.8D, 35mm f/1.8G, 50mm f/1.4G & 70-300VR
SB800, SB600 and other misc lighting equipment

Lenses worth mentioning owned and sold– 12-24 f/4, 17-55 f/2.8, 35-70 f/2.8, 80-200 f/2.8, 20mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.4D, 60mm f/2.8D, 85mm f/1.8, 105mm f/2D-DC, 180mm f/2.8, 300mm f/4D-ED

24-120 f4 looks good choice, but i may need to use higher ISO, if i need to open up further beyond f4. I wonder how good will it be on D90.. may be will do good in D7K and D3 models..
Any inputs?

slimandy said:

It depends what you want. I sold my 28~70 f2.8 after buying the 24~120mm f4 VR. The IQ is lovely, the range is useful and VR comes in handy. It is a stop slower but if I want fast I use primes.
--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Click to expand...

Could not agree more! I have the 35-70 f2.8. My work involves frequent tours of various outdoor facilities -- some big some small. The old 35-70 (I bought it used for $320 from Amazon) has gradually become my go-to lens for these situations. It IS built like a tank and is very sharp. On the D300s it is a great lens for all day carrying around.

bha148 said:

24-120 f4 looks good choice, but i may need to use higher ISO, if i need to open up further beyond f4. I wonder how good will it be on D90.. may be will do good in D7K and D3 models..

Click to expand...

That's a good point. It might be stretching the D90's high ISO abilities. I use it on a D700. I also have the option of the fast primes if things get really dark, though generally I switch for narrow DoF.

bha148 said:

Any inputs?

slimandy said:

It depends what you want. I sold my 28~70 f2.8 after buying the 24~120mm f4 VR. The IQ is lovely, the range is useful and VR comes in handy. It is a stop slower but if I want fast I use primes.
--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

I have owned the 28-70 f2.8. It is a very very good lens, but I sold it because I couldn't get used to it's size and weight. Now don't get me wrong; I am used to handling pro-size and pro-weight lenses, but the 28-70 is something different. Add to that: it's hood is so gigantic that it dit not fit any of my bags !!!

I replaced the 28-70 by a 35-70 f2.8. Also a great lens! Fine optics, and built like a tank. Relatively small an light. A joy to use!! The only drawback: it's front lenselement rotates while focussing. This makes the use of CP and GND filters pretty tricky. As I mainly used this lens for landscapes it was a reason to sell this great little lens.

I have replaced the 35-70 by a 24-85 f2.8-f4. I am using it for about 2 months now, and I realy like it. It's built quality ia not as good as the pro lenses, but it's light and compact. Wide open it is not the sharpest lens around, but I mostly use it stopped down to at least f8, and by then it's a great lens. If you want to use it wide open, I would recoment the 35-70.

Goodlight
Ranamo

I own a Sigma 24-70mm F2,8 EX DG Macro (non HSM) and I love it. Got it used in wonderful condition for about 330 € (~ 470 USD). The noise of the motor hearable. The lens is fast and build like a rock.

Try one but be careful - Sigma sometimes has focusing issues but in general their customer service is ok. I would give this lens 9 out of 10

Use it on my D200 as my regular lens.

Since you are shooting DX, you ought to seriously consider the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. With the perennial $25 rebate on this lens, it goes for $475 new. I just picked one up and love it. It is sharp as a tack and focuses like a champ (I have seen enough people complain about the reliability of focus to suspect that this may vary with the copy of the lens. But mine reliably focused in a club shoot that I just did where my camera was maxed out at ISO 6400, the aperture was at f/2.8 and the shutter speed varied from about 1/10s to 1/30s -- it was dark in there. The lens performed like a champ under those difficult circumstances.) It also focuses nice and close -- you can get up to about a foot away from your subject if you like. It's a really good walking around lens, and a dream for portraiture. One thing that most folks say is that it is way too soft at the edges on an FX body. So, if you are planning on moving up to that, you would probably want to plan on replacing this lens at that time. But, on a DX body, it is terrific.

Great input thanks. So it looks like only two paths available for those who can not afford "the beast" Nikkor 24-70 f2.8..
either go for Sigma/Tamron 28-70 or go for primes like 35mm, 50mm, 85mm 1.8

tclune said:

Since you are shooting DX, you ought to seriously consider the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. With the perennial $25 rebate on this lens, it goes for $475 new. I just picked one up and love it. It is sharp as a tack and focuses like a champ (I have seen enough people complain about the reliability of focus to suspect that this may vary with the copy of the lens. But mine reliably focused in a club shoot that I just did where my camera was maxed out at ISO 6400, the aperture was at f/2.8 and the shutter speed varied from about 1/10s to 1/30s -- it was dark in there. The lens performed like a champ under those difficult circumstances.) It also focuses nice and close -- you can get up to about a foot away from your subject if you like. It's a really good walking around lens, and a dream for portraiture. One thing that most folks say is that it is way too soft at the edges on an FX body. So, if you are planning on moving up to that, you would probably want to plan on replacing this lens at that time. But, on a DX body, it is terrific.

Click to expand...

For a DX camera, the 17-55/2.8 AF-S DX Nikkor.

Im another vote for the 35-70 2.8. Its very sharp and far cheaper and lighter then the other 2 nikons in this range.

On Dx I think this is a great range for street stuff and it doesn't make people uneasy like some of the bigger lenses do
--
Photos - http://roadslesstraveled.smugmug.com/Portfolio/On-The-Road/

I have this lens and enjoy it quite a lot. I picked my cop up used for around $350 I think.

Kurt

2005magnum said:

I have been curious about the Nikon 24-85 2.8-4.0. Is this a viable alternative?
--
http://digitalphotonut.zenfolio.com/

Click to expand...

I bought this lens recently for the D700 to complement my MF primes. I use it mainly for family snaps and events. By todays standards it is kind of an anachronistic lens (push-pull zoom, limited zoom range, rotating front element, no AFS, no VR, no nano coating). But the iq is really excellent. It is smaller, lighter and less intimidating than the 24-70 at a fraction of the cost.