Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
blong10 Junior Member • Posts: 44
Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

I looking to purchase this do go with my D850. I recently purchased a Tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 on eBay but had a lot of issues with it. I returned it for a refund. Anyone using this on a D850 and how do you like it. I'm going to use this for most of my landscape work. And then probably purchase the 14-24

Nikon D850 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
vcxz Regular Member • Posts: 129
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

Just curious what were the issues you had? Focus fine tuning? I did the painstaking process of fine tuning all my Tamron lenses and some of the adjustments were like +17. Can definitely see issues with the fine tuning.

I went the other way and sold the Nikon for the Tamron because it was just too big I never took it anywhere. Haven’t gotten around to fine tuning it yet.

-- hide signature --

Instagram: @vcxz_photos

 vcxz's gear list:vcxz's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D5600 Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED +16 more
OP blong10 Junior Member • Posts: 44
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

I had a lot of issues with it. A lot of the adjustments were like +17 with the Tamron Tap in console. I also had a very weird issue where I would get perfect focus at 50 and 70 mm 2.8 in the view finder but using live view It would back focus a lot. I thought it was my D850 so I tried my 35mm 1.8 and it didn't have any issues like that. I would have to stop down to 3.2 to get it to focus correctly.

raymondg Contributing Member • Posts: 916
Re: I have the Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR and I am very happy ...
1

with the performance of this lens. It is way shape enough edge to edge and focuses quickly. I have used it recently in very low light and was quite impressed with the ability to focus. VR works well too. I also used it recently for architectural shots and was able to easily correct these in PS to eliminated and perspective and distortion issues. I am using it today for a PJ shoot and it will be my main lens. Very versatile. A combination of the 14-24 VR, 24-27 VR and the 70-200 VR FL ED is certainly a winning combination on the D850

-- hide signature --

======================
Warmest Regards - Ray
http://www.500px.com/raymondg
http://www.1x.com/member/raymondg
“We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams.”
- Roald Dahl

 raymondg's gear list:raymondg's gear list
Kodak DCS420 Nikon D1H Nikon D2H Nikon D3 Nikon D3X +16 more
J_o_e_l
J_o_e_l Regular Member • Posts: 186
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR
5

I always appreciated this lens... it focuses SO FAST! And with the addition of VR it became even more fantastic than the G version.

But, it's crazy heavy, doesn't focus very close to objects, and 70mm isn't really very long at all. I actually enjoy using the 24-120 f/4 a lot more. The range is far more useful for my photography than having 2.8 is, it's about a lb lighter, and if it ever breaks they're on eBay for like $500 all day long!

But if you want the 2.8 VR, then my friend you absolutely deserve it and will surely enjoy it. Go for it.

Joel

 J_o_e_l's gear list:J_o_e_l's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR
raymondg Contributing Member • Posts: 916
Re: I also have the Nikon 24-120 f4 VR... and agree with ...
2

a lot of what Joel said. Sometimes I wish my 24-70 2.8 VR had a tripod ring when I use it for landscapes as it is big and it is heavy. However for a lot of what I do it is in the right range and sharper than the 24-120 which I use as a general, walk around and travel lens. For detailed work however, it is the 24-70. Horses for courses and I am thankful that I have both.

-- hide signature --

======================
Warmest Regards - Ray
http://www.500px.com/raymondg
http://www.1x.com/member/raymondg
“We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams.”
- Roald Dahl

 raymondg's gear list:raymondg's gear list
Kodak DCS420 Nikon D1H Nikon D2H Nikon D3 Nikon D3X +16 more
Leonard Shepherd
Leonard Shepherd Forum Pro • Posts: 21,212
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

From a landscape perspective - this lens is optically Nikon's best F mount 24-70.

Hand holding the VR is very good - though at shutter speeds faster than 1/500 VR is generally best switched off.

The lens has automatic tripod mode VR - which is useful on medium strength tripods though - as the Nikon lens advice mentions - on a very good tripod in ideal conditions VR off may produce even sharper results.

Ideally you need to do your own tests to find out how much benefit - and when - VR helps get more sharp detail in an image.

Looking into a crystal ball and the future - the Arneo coating, higher resolution and IBIS with the S lens make it better for landscapes, particularly when the sky is included - at a new street price not much more than the lens you are looking at. You need an ML body to use it.

As more switch to Z over time as "better" ML bodies are launched the second hand price of the lens you are looking at is likely to fall.

For a landscape specialist ML with real time dof in the viewfinder (currently down to f5.6 but maybe f8 on later models), good focus peaking, much brighter viewfinder image at f11 using dof preview and subject magnification at a quick touch of a button I consider a good route to take.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED +25 more
Mward1226 Regular Member • Posts: 150
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR
3

I have been using the 24-70 f2.8 VR with my D850 and D810 since Sept of 17.  Before that I had the old 28-70 F2.8.  I have been extremely happy with this lens,  it is very sharp and required very little focus adjustment.  I don't shoot much commercial work anymore, just landscape for my own enjoyment.  My backpack usually has both bodies, the 14-24 F2.8, 24-70 F2.8 VR and the 70-200 FL, which has proven to be a great combination.  However I am in the process of replacing the D810(backup camera) with a Z7II,  the 14-30 and 24-70 F4 lens's.  My goal is not to replace the D850 but to have a high quality system for landscape work this is both lighter and less bulk for long hikes.  I think the Z system will cut about 3 lbs off my backpack between the system and not needing the Lee SW150 filter system.

You can't go wrong with Nikon's 24-70 VR.

 Mward1226's gear list:Mward1226's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED VR +9 more
PHXAZCRAIG
PHXAZCRAIG Forum Pro • Posts: 17,417
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

I've been shooting the VR version since 2016 when my G version developed a case of 'zoom grind'.  Initially on a D810, but on a D850 for the last few years.

I can't compare it to a Tamron, but I can compare it to the G version.

First thing I thought I noticed was a decrease in sharpness in the center.   This is just pixel peeping the first images as I was taking them while walking around Hong Kong.   I've thought about that a lot since then, and I think it was more that the G version dropped off in sharpness more to the edges, and that made the center seem sharper.

Overall, I think the VR version is better (sharpness, optical characteristics), but other than it really being more consistent from center to edge, there isn't that much difference.   As one who used both lenses I find non-optical characteristics make more differences that you notice in the field.

First, there is VR.   For my type of shooting, which is often travel, I find this makes the most difference in the evenings.   Probably because I'm never up in the early mornings, but there are times when I really need to shoot with a 1/30th shutter speed.

Second, there is an 82mm filter thread.   Why is this the second-most important difference for me to list here?   Because it destroys the compatibility I had with the other two lenses in my travel kit (80-400g and 16-35vr).  With the 24-70g, all three lenses shared a single CP filter AND you could interchange the lens caps on each.   It was much more convenient to change lenses and be able to simply pull the lens cap from the new lens and put it on the one coming off camera.   Now I have to track two lens caps and carry a second CP filter.

Third, the VR version is fatter where you place your left hand to zoom.    Doesn't make much practical difference, but i remember that difference every time I lift the lens.  Practically though, it makes almost no difference other than the feel and a bit more tightness when packing.

Overall, it's a fine zoom lens in a somewhat boring (but documentary) focal range that has minor flaws and just gets out of your way.   It's fine wide open or stopped down.   VR works, and seems most useful to me for video, except I just don't do video.   It has good sharpness, good flare control, good focus accuracy (more the camera there), an effective lens hood, correctable vignetting, etc.

-- hide signature --

Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net
"I miss the days when I was nostalgic."

 PHXAZCRAIG's gear list:PHXAZCRAIG's gear list
Nikon D80 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V1 +37 more
M Lammerse
M Lammerse Forum Pro • Posts: 11,545
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

blong10 wrote:

I looking to purchase this do go with my D850. I recently purchased a Tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 on eBay but had a lot of issues with it. I returned it for a refund. Anyone using this on a D850 and how do you like it. I'm going to use this for most of my landscape work. And then probably purchase the 14-24

As long as you stay away from video (when using VR) the lens is very good. Wide open the older G version might be a bit sharper but rendering and bokeh is in my opinion better with the E-Vr version.

Michel

NotASpeckOfCereal Senior Member • Posts: 1,812
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:

Second, there is an 82mm filter thread. Why is this the second-most important difference for me to list here? Because it destroys the compatibility I had with the other two lenses in my travel kit (80-400g and 16-35vr). With the 24-70g, all three lenses shared a single CP filter AND you could interchange the lens caps on each

Ouch, that would be an issue for me too. I've invested a lot in filters and made the choice based on my largest filter size at the time (using step-up filters for the smaller sizes): 77mm, including my 24-70 G. I still only have only 1 lens over that.

However, for my part, the G version will do just fine anyway. I'm mostly shooting primes these days. Having the 24-70mm is nice at times, but is no longer my go-to in those focal lengths.

Chris

 NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list:NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D850 Fujifilm GFX 100S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +16 more
toomanycanons Forum Pro • Posts: 13,424
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR
1

J_o_e_l wrote:

I always appreciated this lens... it focuses SO FAST! And with the addition of VR it became even more fantastic than the G version.

But, it's crazy heavy, doesn't focus very close to objects, and 70mm isn't really very long at all. I actually enjoy using the 24-120 f/4 a lot more. The range is far more useful for my photography than having 2.8 is, it's about a lb lighter, and if it ever breaks they're on eBay for like $500 all day long!

But if you want the 2.8 VR, then my friend you absolutely deserve it and will surely enjoy it. Go for it.

Joel

Or a sharp copy of the 24-85 VR.  Feather weight compared to the the 24-70 and 24-120...if you don't need a constant f/2.8.

I have a Sigma 24-70 OS which is very sharp edge to edge.  It isn't feather weight but it's lighter than the Nikon 24-70 VR.  Haven't needed to fine tune it at all but it does have issues with the OS (need to press the shutter well before you want to take the shot to let the OS settle in) so I mostly shoot it with the OS off.

Seems like all lenses are a compromise of some sort.

welshwizard Contributing Member • Posts: 528
Re: I have the Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR and I am very happy ...

raymondg wrote:

with the performance of this lens. It is way shape enough edge to edge and focuses quickly. I have used it recently in very low light and was quite impressed with the ability to focus. VR works well too. I also used it recently for architectural shots and was able to easily correct these in PS to eliminated and perspective and distortion issues. I am using it today for a PJ shoot and it will be my main lens. Very versatile. A combination of the 14-24 VR, 24-27 VR and the 70-200 VR FL ED is certainly a winning combination on the D850

Unless you have a unicorn, unless I am very much mistaken there is no 14-24VR.

I'll let you off re: 24-27

-- hide signature --

20 years ago a maginifent Mickey Thomas free-kick and Steve Watkin's sublime winner knocked the Gunners out of the FA Cup - 1st vs 92nd... Let's hope Andy Morrell's Red Army continue WREXHAM's unsurpassed Giant-Killing tradition tomorrow.....

 welshwizard's gear list:welshwizard's gear list
Pentax K-1
Fullframer Contributing Member • Posts: 877
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR
3

vcxz wrote:

Just curious what were the issues you had? Focus fine tuning? I did the painstaking process of fine tuning all my Tamron lenses and some of the adjustments were like +17. Can definitely see issues with the fine tuning.

I went the other way and sold the Nikon for the Tamron because it was just too big I never took it anywhere. Haven’t gotten around to fine tuning it yet.

If you had to fine tune your lenses to +17, you should have returned them if you could, for another copy.   Mfg defect.     Most of my Nikon pro's were perfect, no fine tuning,  the rare ones that did, I returned them for another copy, which was than fine.

The Tamron isn't exactly light, it's nearly 900 grams,  only 170 grams lighter.

Fullframer Contributing Member • Posts: 877
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

J_o_e_l wrote:

I always appreciated this lens... it focuses SO FAST! And with the addition of VR it became even more fantastic than the G version.

But, it's crazy heavy, doesn't focus very close to objects, and 70mm isn't really very long at all. I actually enjoy using the 24-120 f/4 a lot more. The range is far more useful for my photography than having 2.8 is, it's about a lb lighter, and if it ever breaks they're on eBay for like $500 all day long!

You are comparing a kit zoom lens to one of nikons best pro zoom lens, lol.    The 24-120 F4 is 2/3 the weight of the 24-70. The 24-70 has better minimum focus distance 1.25 feet vs 1.48 feet , better built and it's brighter to look through the viewfinder in darker conditions. Better sharpness throughout. Focus speed. one of nikons fastest focusing lens.

The 24-120 extra zoom range IMHO aren't worth the worse picture quality. It isn't that sharp in the corners and has alot of visible chromatic aberration. That counts in landscape photos. Last update was 2010. 24-70 was updated in 2015. Newer lens are always sharper/better.

J_o_e_l
J_o_e_l Regular Member • Posts: 186
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

Fullframer wrote:

J_o_e_l wrote:

I always appreciated this lens... it focuses SO FAST! And with the addition of VR it became even more fantastic than the G version.

But, it's crazy heavy, doesn't focus very close to objects, and 70mm isn't really very long at all. I actually enjoy using the 24-120 f/4 a lot more. The range is far more useful for my photography than having 2.8 is, it's about a lb lighter, and if it ever breaks they're on eBay for like $500 all day long!

You are comparing a kit zoom lens to one of nikons best pro zoom lens, lol. The 24-120 F4 is 2/3 the weight of the 24-70. The 24-70 has better minimum focus distance 1.25 feet vs 1.48 feet , better built and it's brighter to look through the viewfinder in darker conditions. Better sharpness throughout. Focus speed. one of nikons fastest focusing lens.

The 24-120 extra zoom range IMHO aren't worth the worse picture quality. It isn't that sharp in the corners and has alot of visible chromatic aberration. That counts in landscape photos. Last update was 2010. 24-70 was updated in 2015. Newer lens are always sharper/better.

You are de-legitimizing a gold-ringed nano-coated zoom lens with a constant aperture and outstanding VR that ships with Nikon's highest technical image quality cameras as a "kit zoom"...lol

Let's not go making readers feel inferior because they choose to not be burdened by impractical weight, size and bloated cost, for a non-linear return in value.

 J_o_e_l's gear list:J_o_e_l's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR
PHXAZCRAIG
PHXAZCRAIG Forum Pro • Posts: 17,417
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

I also like to shoot with primes, but then there is travel.   When I travel, other than for diving, it could be anywhere in the world, and it definitely means getting into scenarios where I don't know ahead of time what lens would be best.

That means, for travel, I value flexibility.   My ideal choices here would be 14-24, 24-70 and 80-400.

But I also value being able to walk at the end of a day carrying my gear around.   Until I was about 50 I favored a shoulder bag.  After years of carrying 6-7 lenses and two bodies and a flash (and I almost never use flash when traveling), I just decided I had to cut down the weight AND I had to get the weight off my shoulders.   That led me to one of my wiser decisions over the years; get a waist bag that holds barely enough and limit myself to what fits in it.   Hence a 3-zoom / one body limit (and no flash).

Since I use gripped DSLR I had only one choice, from Thinktank, and that was the Speed Racer.  It has worked perfectly for me since 2008.    I tried a rolling bag for a while, but it was one that didn't have backpack straps and was ultimately not flexible enough for travel.  Now I use it for my underwater gear, which requires the roller, the waist bag and a bit more space in a suitcase as well.

Now that I had a bag, I had to fill it.  Back when I got it, I was shooting a D300 with 12-24, 24-70g and 80-400af-d.   When I switched to FX with a D700, I had to swap the wide lens for an FX one.   My first choice was a 14-24, but it would not fit in the bag.   So I opted for the 16-35 in 2013 and have used it ever since.

Initially all worked well from 2008 to 2016.   When the 80-400g came out, I immediately swapped it for the rather poor 80-400AF-D, but although the g was a bit longer, it still fit.

In 2016 my 24-70g began to develop a case of zoom grind while on a vacation trip to China.  In 2 days it went from fine to being difficult to zoom past about 35mm, and it was getting worse.    I just so happened to be in Hong Kong at the time, and the 24-70vr had come out a few months earlier.  I was able to find a new one ($400 cheaper than the US, no USA warranty), and I bought it.   Packed up the failing 3 into the box for the VR and haven't looked at it since.

So slamming the VR into the place of the G was a way to highlight the differences immediately.   That's when I noticed the filter/cap issue.     I also used the new lens for a while that day before discovering the VR was set to off.

The second thing I noticed was that I thought the lens wasn't quite as sharp as the G.   This surprised me a bit, even though I read the g was slightly sharper in the center.  After years of using the VR, I don't think it is noticeably sharper, but the dropoff in sharpness between center and edge on the G makes one perceive it to be sharper.   The VR is clearly better edge-to-edge, and off-center compositions are better on the VR.

The VR also proved useful, not just in shooting stills but doing videos of the Hong Kong harbor lights display.

Four years later, I'm happy with the 24-70vr, and I still find the difference in filter size a bit of a pain, mostly due to having to keep track of its lens cap.

By the way, the VR body is noticeable fatter than the g body, but I haven't found anywhere that causes an issue.

-- hide signature --

Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net
"I miss the days when I was nostalgic."

 PHXAZCRAIG's gear list:PHXAZCRAIG's gear list
Nikon D80 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V1 +37 more
Sagittarius Veteran Member • Posts: 7,236
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:

By the way, the VR body is noticeable fatter than the g body, but I haven't found anywhere that causes an issue.

Because there is a VR unit inside the lens body.

-- hide signature --

Best regards

 Sagittarius's gear list:Sagittarius's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm F2.8G IF-ED VR +5 more
NotASpeckOfCereal Senior Member • Posts: 1,812
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR
1

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:

I also like to shoot with primes, but then there is travel. When I travel, other than for diving, it could be anywhere in the world, and it definitely means getting into scenarios where I don't know ahead of time what lens would be best.

That means, for travel, I value flexibility. My ideal choices here would be 14-24, 24-70 and 80-400.

Yes, I have kept my nicer zooms for scenarios that don't involve carrying a larger bag of lenses.

But there are two kinds of travel 1) photography travel, where I need my best lenses, and 2) travel that is not primarily a photographic expedition, when I can bring less.

Unfortunately, I don't get to do a lot of #2 these days.

I'm 64yo and still carry a large backpack of gear, but I do try to leave things in the car / motel that I don't think I'll need for a days outing (for those times when I know what I'm going to be shooting).

Also, I wonder if carrying 3-4 primes is really heavier than carrying 2 gold-ring / fast zoom lenses for the same range (like the 14-24mm and 24-70mm).

Chris

 NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list:NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D850 Fujifilm GFX 100S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +16 more
BISCUT Regular Member • Posts: 432
Re: Thinking of getting a Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR

I moved to the Z system but retained the D850.  The 850 is a great camera on it's own.  I have the trinity and primarily use them.  The 70-200 2.8 FL and the 24-70 2.8 E coupled with the 850 is exactly why I just can't let gooooo.

This combo far exceeds my talent level.  It's no the "bomb" in the center but it is very good and does a great job outward toward the corners.  It is large and heavy but so is the D850.  I've been happy with mine.

 BISCUT's gear list:BISCUT's gear list
Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC +14 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads