Reading mode: Light Dark

The 24-70 f2.8 ii sure is tempting......

Go to last post
NacMacFeegle

NacMacFeegle

Leading Member
Messages
686
Reaction score
870
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range. However, there are a few reasons why I'm actually considering picking up NIkon's new 24-70 f2.8 ii.
  • First and perhaps most significant to me is that this is that this features an internal zoom. I frequently shoot in dusty, dirty, wet environments, and extending zoom lenses are a liability in such scenarios, even if they are weathersealed.
  • The smaller size/weight make it much more appealing to me than the previous version. I use standard-range lenses most frequently in circumstances where I can't carry too much gear, and/or I don't want to be changing lenses in a hostile environment.
  • The improved ability to close-focus puts it roughly on-par with the 24-120 in this regard. It's an important factor, and one of the reasons I never picked up the mk 1 version of the 24-70 2.8.
  • Improved image quality is certainly a bonus, as I am frequently irritated by the vignetting I get with the 24-120.
  • Faster focus is important to me too, though it's not a big deal since my 24-120 focuses plenty fast.
I'm not quite sold on the lens however - the rumored Laowa 200mm f2 seems like something I might want to save my pennies for instead, and quite frankly $2800 is too much for a 24-70 f2.8. If it was a 24-70 f2, then I'd have put in my pre-order already at that price, but for what it is, $2800 is steep. Given that this is a lens that will last me for decades, I realize such quibbles are somewhat silly, but it nonetheless is enough to make me hesitate, particularly when I know if I give it a year or two, I'll be able to get it for $2500 on a rebate deal (unless tariffs jack it up of course). I also hesitate because its just such a utilitarian sort of lens, and it's hard to want to spend that kind of money on it when I have a lens already that gets the job done.

Anyway, that's my thoughts on this lens - I certainly didn't expect to be tempted by a 24-70 in 2025!
 
Back in the day, primes offered you very wide apertures, high quality optics and compactness at relatively great prices. I value all of those things, and compactness in particular, so I went to town on primes on the F-mount and largely sidestepped the expensive and large fast zooms.

On the Z-mount, the primes are of course excellent and fast, but they're also quite expensive and also large and heavy, which suddenly makes this zoom look like a pretty reasonable deal. A "bag of primes in one zoom," as they say, for $2800. If I were just getting into the Z mount today, I'd be tempted to just get this plus, say, the 40mm for when I want compactness. But since I'm not starting today, I'll stick with the 24-120 and my many primes.
 
If you don't like the focal range, the lens is going to collect dust, regardless of the bells and whistles. Your GAS is speaking here, IMO.
 
Last edited:
I am considering jumping back into Z land with a Z8 and ZF, the 24-120 was my decided choice as a go to lens, but would definitely consider adding the new 24-70 2.8ii…the 2.8 with internal zoom at 1.5lbs with better optics, wow, the only negative is the price…the versatility of the 24-120 would probably win out and it is significantly cheaper.
 
Ryan Schwartz said:
If you don't like the focal range, the lens is going to collect dust, regardless of the bells and whistles. Your GAS is speaking here, IMO.
Click to expand...
GAS definitely plays a part, but it absolutely would not collect dust. It's a focal range I find very useful, and which I use frequently, but at the same time find somewhat boring from a creative standpoint.
 
I’ll sell my mk 1 and get the mk 2 for sure, internal focus, lighter and clicky control ring. It might even replace my 24-120 f4 as a travel lens.
 
Last Mango said:
I am considering jumping back into Z land with a Z8 and ZF, the 24-120 was my decided choice as a go to lens, but would definitely consider adding the new 24-70 2.8ii…the 2.8 with internal zoom at 1.5lbs with better optics, wow, the only negative is the price…the versatility of the 24-120 would probably win out and it is significantly cheaper.
Click to expand...
Personally, if I was just jumping onto the Z mount, I would almost certainly be picking up the 24-70 2.8ii. even though the 24-120 f4 is a great lens. However, I will say that when I switched from the 24-70 f4 to the 24-120 f4, the extra 50mm of reach felt like a breath of fresh air, and I would miss it going back to the 24-70 range now.
 
The price is steep. Always listen to your wallet first, and when Nikon finally gets the message that it needs to go down a few hundred dollars, then that's when you can pull the trigger.
 
The Vers. 1 certainly gets the job done (and then some, the best 24-70 I ever used) and I actually use the digital focal length readout frequently when I have to match setups, but the simpler built, weight and size wins me over for location schlepp and durability and the AF improvement makes this a temptation that I will not resist. The icing on the cake is the sunshade with Pola rotation access, love this and the 77mm filter (so it matches the 70-200, thank you).

So it's on (pre) order, and I can't wait to start using it asap.

And yes, I would love a 28/35-85/90, 2.8; f2 maybe a bit too much to ask for at an acceptable weight/size/price point.
 
Droster said:
The price is steep. Always listen to your wallet first, and when Nikon finally gets the message that it needs to go down a few hundred dollars, then that's when you can pull the trigger.
Click to expand...
I'm not in the market for any more gear right now, and the price tag certainly won't give me GAS.
 
NacMacFeegle said:
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range. However, there are a few reasons why I'm actually considering picking up NIkon's new 24-70 f2.8 ii.
  • First and perhaps most significant to me is that this is that this features an internal zoom. I frequently shoot in dusty, dirty, wet environments, and extending zoom lenses are a liability in such scenarios, even if they are weathersealed.
  • The smaller size/weight make it much more appealing to me than the previous version. I use standard-range lenses most frequently in circumstances where I can't carry too much gear, and/or I don't want to be changing lenses in a hostile environment.
  • The improved ability to close-focus puts it roughly on-par with the 24-120 in this regard. It's an important factor, and one of the reasons I never picked up the mk 1 version of the 24-70 2.8.
  • Improved image quality is certainly a bonus, as I am frequently irritated by the vignetting I get with the 24-120.
  • Faster focus is important to me too, though it's not a big deal since my 24-120 focuses plenty fast.
I'm not quite sold on the lens however - the rumored Laowa 200mm f2 seems like something I might want to save my pennies for instead, and quite frankly $2800 is too much for a 24-70 f2.8. If it was a 24-70 f2, then I'd have put in my pre-order already at that price, but for what it is, $2800 is steep. Given that this is a lens that will last me for decades, I realize such quibbles are somewhat silly, but it nonetheless is enough to make me hesitate, particularly when I know if I give it a year or two, I'll be able to get it for $2500 on a rebate deal (unless tariffs jack it up of course). I also hesitate because its just such a utilitarian sort of lens, and it's hard to want to spend that kind of money on it when I have a lens already that gets the job done.

Anyway, that's my thoughts on this lens - I certainly didn't expect to be tempted by a 24-70 in 2025!
Click to expand...
it's tempting, but honestly when I realized that the cost to "upgrade" from my mark I was going to be $1200 in the end, the hype/temptation quickly went away. (No, I'm not upgrading. The only real benefit I saw for myself was the 77m filter thread and the smaller/lighter package, but it's not enough for me to want to spend another $1200. For that amount of money, I'll deal with the extra 165g.

(And actually, I don't really use my 24-70 that much anymore anyway, so upgrading would just be like me putting cash on the shelf, and hardly ever using it.)

--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *
 
Last edited:
NacMacFeegle said:
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range. However, there are a few reasons why I'm actually considering picking up NIkon's new 24-70 f2.8 ii.
  • First and perhaps most significant to me is that this is that this features an internal zoom. I frequently shoot in dusty, dirty, wet environments, and extending zoom lenses are a liability in such scenarios, even if they are weathersealed.
  • The smaller size/weight make it much more appealing to me than the previous version. I use standard-range lenses most frequently in circumstances where I can't carry too much gear, and/or I don't want to be changing lenses in a hostile environment.
Click to expand...
The weight is less but the length isn't that much different until you zoom out the Version 1. I imagine the reduced diameter, lighter weight, and constant size will make the Version II feel and handle much differently
NacMacFeegle said:
  • The improved ability to close-focus puts it roughly on-par with the 24-120 in this regard. It's an important factor, and one of the reasons I never picked up the mk 1 version of the 24-70 2.8.
  • Improved image quality is certainly a bonus, as I am frequently irritated by the vignetting I get with the 24-120.
  • Faster focus is important to me too, though it's not a big deal since my 24-120 focuses plenty fast.
I'm not quite sold on the lens however - the rumored Laowa 200mm f2 seems like something I might want to save my pennies for instead, and quite frankly $2800 is too much for a 24-70 f2.8. If it was a 24-70 f2, then I'd have put in my pre-order already at that price, but for what it is, $2800 is steep. Given that this is a lens that will last me for decades, I realize such quibbles are somewhat silly, but it nonetheless is enough to make me hesitate, particularly when I know if I give it a year or two, I'll be able to get it for $2500 on a rebate deal (unless tariffs jack it up of course). I also hesitate because its just such a utilitarian sort of lens, and it's hard to want to spend that kind of money on it when I have a lens already that gets the job done.

Anyway, that's my thoughts on this lens - I certainly didn't expect to be tempted by a 24-70 in 2025!
Click to expand...
I really like my version 1. It's one of those lenses you can use at any FL and any aperture and be confident that if the image doesn't match what you expect, it won't be the fault of the lens. I suspect that the handling alone is going to see a lot of Version 1 trades. I am personally torn between the version II and the Plena.

Yes it is expensive but as my cousin keeps telling me, shrouds don't have pockets.
 
sirhawkeye64 said:
NacMacFeegle said:
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range. However, there are a few reasons why I'm actually considering picking up NIkon's new 24-70 f2.8 ii.
Click to expand...
it's tempting, but honestly when I realized that the cost to "upgrade" from my mark I was going to be $1200 in the end, the hype/temptation quickly went away. (No, I'm not upgrading. The only real benefit I saw for myself was the 77m filter thread and the smaller/lighter package, but it's not enough for me to want to spend another $1200. For that amount of money, I'll deal with the extra 165g.

(And actually, I don't really use my 24-70 that much anymore anyway, so upgrading would just be like me putting cash on the shelf, and hardly ever using it.)
Click to expand...
By all counts, IMO the upgrade from the 24-70mm/f2.8 S version 1 to version 2 is at best some incremental improvements in a number of areas. Nikon did an excellent job with version 1 so that there is only a limited amount of room for improvements.

Meanwhile, I checked YouTube, and there are all sorts of influencer videos, all released synchronously with the announcement on August 22. Besides the usual suspects such as Ricci from the UK/Nikon Europe (Ricci has two separate videos), Mark Cruz from Nikon USA/Canada, Matt Irvin from Australia ..., there are YouTube videos from Nikon France and I found several videos from China and Hong Kong in different Chinese dialects. Even B&H produced one as well. As in all marketing materials, they emphasis the advantages to generate GAS.

One unknown is that most likely, Nikon will update the Z9 to a version 2 and/or produce a video-centric Z body with cooperation from RED. Whether we need to use new lenses such as version 2 to take full advantage of new features in the not-yet-released cameras is still an unknown, but the majority of those features are likely video related.

I just put three lenses on the scale, without any lens cap, lens hood, or filter:
  • Z 24-120mm/f4 S: 636 grams
  • Z 24-70mm/f2.8 S, v1 816 grams
  • F 24-70mm/f2.8 E VR 1082 grams
The new 24-70mm/f2.8 S ii is supposed to be 675 grams. It is only slightly heavier than the 24-120/4. When I hold them, I can certainly feel that the 24-120 is lighter than the version 1 24-70/2.8, but it is not a huge difference. Nikon has done a great job that version 2 is only slightly heavier than the 24-120/4, but I wouldn't go crazy about the weight savings.
 
shuncheung said:
sirhawkeye64 said:
NacMacFeegle said:
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range. However, there are a few reasons why I'm actually considering picking up NIkon's new 24-70 f2.8 ii.
Click to expand...
it's tempting, but honestly when I realized that the cost to "upgrade" from my mark I was going to be $1200 in the end, the hype/temptation quickly went away. (No, I'm not upgrading. The only real benefit I saw for myself was the 77m filter thread and the smaller/lighter package, but it's not enough for me to want to spend another $1200. For that amount of money, I'll deal with the extra 165g.

(And actually, I don't really use my 24-70 that much anymore anyway, so upgrading would just be like me putting cash on the shelf, and hardly ever using it.)
Click to expand...
By all counts, IMO the upgrade from the 24-70mm/f2.8 S version 1 to version 2 is at best some incremental improvements in a number of areas. Nikon did an excellent job with version 1 so that there is only a limited amount of room for improvements.

Meanwhile, I checked YouTube, and there are all sorts of influencer videos, all released synchronously with the announcement on August 22. Besides the usual suspects such as Ricci from the UK/Nikon Europe (Ricci has two separate videos), Mark Cruz from Nikon USA/Canada, Matt Irvin from Australia ..., there are YouTube videos from Nikon France and I found several videos from China and Hong Kong in different Chinese dialects. Even B&H produced one as well. As in all marketing materials, they emphasis the advantages to generate GAS.

One unknown is that most likely, Nikon will update the Z9 to a version 2 and/or produce a video-centric Z body with cooperation from RED. Whether we need to use new lenses such as version 2 to take full advantage of new features in the not-yet-released cameras is still an unknown, but the majority of those features are likely video related.

I just put three lenses on the scale, without any lens cap, lens hood, or filter:
  • Z 24-120mm/f4 S: 636 grams
  • Z 24-70mm/f2.8 S, v1 816 grams
  • F 24-70mm/f2.8 E VR 1082 grams
The new 24-70mm/f2.8 S ii is supposed to be 675 grams. It is only slightly heavier than the 24-120/4. When I hold them, I can certainly feel that the 24-120 is lighter than the version 1 24-70/2.8, but it is not a huge difference. Nikon has done a great job that version 2 is only slightly heavier than the 24-120/4, but I wouldn't go crazy about the weight savings.
Click to expand...
Yes I think they're more incremental than substantial, unless you consider things like an internal zoom a huge plus. The one thing that caught my eye on Ricci's video was the possible focus breathing at 70mm, especially considering the new 24-70 is likely geared more towards video people.

Yes the difference between the first gen 24-70 and a 24-120 is not that big of a difference, although I still do feel on some cameras like the Zf, the 24-70 does feel a bit heavier, but on my Z8 not so much (the differences in grip size might make the difference).

--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *
 
Last edited:
It's very tempting. It's lighter, faster focusing and, from certain reviews a little sharper in the corners than the 1st Z 24-70 f2.8. But for a very few, such as myself, the VCM focusing motor could be bad for your health. For those who don't know, and should, if you have a medical device that can be affected by a strong magnetic field, such as a pacemaker, do not get or use this lens. It could affect the device and put you in danger. Since I love my current ...70 f2,8S, I'm not too unhappy about not getting this lens, although my G.A.S. is tugging at me. What I'm concerned about is; at one point the other "Trinity Lenses, and perhaps some primes will also get VCM in the future. The 400 f2.8 TC, and 600 f4 TC already have it. If that trend continues, I won't be able to buy Nikon, or at least those lenses with VCM.
 
Droster said:
The price is steep.
Click to expand...
Not really. The original Z 24-70 F2.8 debuted in 2019 at $2400 USD. The new one at $2800 USD is slightly cheaper based on inflation.
Droster said:
Always listen to your wallet first, and when Nikon finally gets the message that it needs to go down a few hundred dollars, then that's when you can pull the trigger.
Click to expand...
True, but we don't know when they will discount it.
 
NacMacFeegle said:
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range.

Anyway, that's my thoughts on this lens - I certainly didn't expect to be tempted by a 24-70 in 2025!
Click to expand...
24-70 - most boring, uninspiring, focal range - pass!

You are tempted by the tech, as we all are, but keep in mind it will soon trickle down to other lenses...

Wait for focal length you really need and enjoy shooting with...

I'm curious what they do with 70-200, can they get it under 1kg
 
mesija said:
NacMacFeegle said:
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range.

Anyway, that's my thoughts on this lens - I certainly didn't expect to be tempted by a 24-70 in 2025!
Click to expand...
24-70 - most boring, uninspiring, focal range - pass!

You are tempted by the tech, as we all are, but keep in mind it will soon trickle down to other lenses...

Wait for focal length you really need and enjoy shooting with...
Click to expand...
Agreed. Even if the OP finds the range useful, boring and uninspiring is going to trump it, and it's not going to get used, period. But if OP feels otherwise, it's their money, do what you want with it. Just trying to be helpful and save the OP some money that is obvious to me a GAS purchase.
 
Last edited:
Ryan Schwartz said:
mesija said:
NacMacFeegle said:
The 24-70 focal range has never really thrilled me. I love bright primes in that range, but I just find 24-70 zooms to be rather boring. That's why I've always been happy with f4 lenses in the wide-to-tele range.

Anyway, that's my thoughts on this lens - I certainly didn't expect to be tempted by a 24-70 in 2025!
Click to expand...
24-70 - most boring, uninspiring, focal range - pass!

You are tempted by the tech, as we all are, but keep in mind it will soon trickle down to other lenses...

Wait for focal length you really need and enjoy shooting with...
Click to expand...
Agreed. Even if the OP finds the range useful, boring and uninspiring is going to trump it, and it's not going to get used, period. But if OP feels otherwise, it's their money, do what you want with it. Just trying to be helpful and save the OP some money that is obvious to me a GAS purchase.
Click to expand...
I sure don't find 24-70 a "boring" zoom range. I started with an F-mount 35-70mm/f2.8 AF zoom, followed by a 28-70mm/f2.8 AF-S and then a 24-70mm/f2.8 E AF-S VR. The gradual expansion to the wider end makes it a great event and party lens. I also have the 24-120mm/f4 which is very useful. However, if one wants f2.8, I would stick with 24-70. Canon has a 24-105mm/f2.8 that is over 3 pounds. Both Canon and Sony have 28-70mm/f2, and once again those are around 3 pounds. I would much rather not hold such a heavy lens all day. Moreover, I usually stop down somewhat to gain depth of field when there are multiple people in the image.

For landscape photography, I am more receptive to a lighter lens that uses 77mm filters. I have more polarizers and various ND filters in 77mm. My only other lens that uses 82mm filters is the 14-30mm/f4 S.
 
Last edited:
Fullframer said:
Droster said:
The price is steep.
Click to expand...
Not really. The original Z 24-70 F2.8 debuted in 2019 at $2400 USD. The new one at $2800 USD is slightly cheaper based on inflation.
Click to expand...
That would only be relevant if wages had kept up with inflation.
Fullframer said:
Fullframer said:
Always listen to your wallet first, and when Nikon finally gets the message that it needs to go down a few hundred dollars, then that's when you can pull the trigger.
Click to expand...
True, but we don't know when they will discount it.
Click to expand...
They currently have rebates on lenses as recent as late 2023, so I'd expect no later than Summer 2027, no earlier than Fall 2026.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
24-70 replacing all primes?
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
polizonte
polizonte
N
Already have a 70-200... 24-70 or 24-120?
2 3
Replies
48
Views
14K
buildingsights
B
F
  • User review User review
Nikon's Best Lens
2 3
Replies
59
Views
10K
Fabian Joya
F
NikonMan09
24-70 F2.8 II trend: More Silky Swift VCM motors in future lenses?
Replies
2
Views
681
ajr images
A
F
Nikon Z 24-70 f/2.8 S II Bokeh Test
Replies
10
Views
9K
Rodenmg
Rodenmg

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