I just pulled the trigger on a 24-70. I don't think a VR will come out at the time of the D800 announcement, but if it does I'll return it, I suppose.
My only regret is that unlike my 17-35, it cannot be used with my F2s.

sevencrossing said:
Assuming the subject is not moving, @24mm I can shoot at 1/15 or slower very useful in a dim church, unless this is the event

Great video :D

Godless said:
Who REALLY needs VR with focal lengths below 100mm?

Assuming the subject is not moving, @24mm I can shoot at 1/15 or slower very useful in a dim church, unless this is the event

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-94JhLEiN0

Godless said:
Who REALLY needs VR with focal lengths below 100mm?

+1 Agreed.

The 24-70mm was my last lens purchase in the "trifecta" It is now my "go-to" lens and on my camera pretty much all the time. Use it much more than the 70-200 or the 14-24. Should have bought it first!

Godless said:
Who REALLY needs VR with focal lengths below 100mm?

Exactly!

Who REALLY needs VR with focal lengths below 100mm?

would love to see one, but I doubt it's gonna be released soon - there's a lot of different lenses that needs to be upgraded before this one

Boy I'd hate to see how much that would cost especially with the 70-200mm VR II going for nearly 3 grand yikes...

Thanks to everyone for their comments. I know what i'm getting for xmas now.

Having the 24-70 2.8 is, in my humble opinion, a no brainer. I use it a lot and each time the result just makes me prrr. In short, it is a must have. IF you are really looking for a lens that has VR that is close to this range, then the 16-35 F/4 would be my recommendation.

Long live the "holly trinity set!!"

Im guessing the 24-70 replacement will be a f/4 and bigger than the 27-70mm like their wide replacement :P

I assume that the high mpx in the D800 (?) will be addressed in any lenses that are released with it (higher lens resolution?). I going to guess a fast prime. I would love it if it was the 28-200 f2.8 and the 10mm f/4 they patented

That's what I think every time I hear it.

TaoTeJared said:
I think waiting for this one and a 85mm 1.4 vr is like waiting for the second coming. I have seen some sub patents filed for years so you know they keep trying designs but something keeps them from building one. Size? Cost? Who knows.

I'm wondering why VR is so hard with this length of zoom. Canon nor Nikon has done it yet. I don't want to think about the price - $2,500+? Probably in that range for sure.

Good luck with the 85mm 1.4 VR, especially when the G is so new.

I think waiting for this one and a 85mm 1.4 vr is like waiting for the second coming. I have seen some sub patents filed for years so you know they keep trying designs but something keeps them from building one. Size? Cost? Who knows.

I'm wondering why VR is so hard with this length of zoom. Canon nor Nikon has done it yet. I don't want to think about the price - $2,500+? Probably in that range for sure.

I'm with the camp that says, if you need it, get it. If you can afford to wait 6 months, maybe you don't really need the lens at all?

The current 24-70mm F2.8 is a great lens, no need to wait, IMO.

I shoot a D7000, so DX. I usually try to keep my shutter speeds at least 1/60 while handholding but I have gotten decent results as slow as 1/15 or 1/30 with some sort of structure to lean against while shooting. The beauty of that lens is that it's sharp at F2.8 so you can actually shoot fasters shutter speeds to reduce chances of blur.

Ronin.1 said:
Do you use it on an FX or DX body?

One thing about slow shutter speeds is that VR can not compensate for subject movement so there are many situations where an very slow shutter speed simply is not useful.

I only have FX bodies. I mainly use it at it's wide end and so have never missed VR.

SkintBrit said:
The 24-70 2.8 is my standard lens for weddings and events, buy one now, you won't be disappointed. I agree with iris chrome and Rx4Photo, not sure I've ever wished it had VR.

Do you use it on an FX or DX body?

One thing about slow shutter speeds is that VR can not compensate for subject movement so there are many situations where an very slow shutter speed simply is not useful.

unless you are doing sports, Another vote for the 24-120 vr f4
pin sharp wide open

Nikon seem to be increasing the range of f 4 lenses
70-200 VR f 4 expected soon
200-400 f4 already established as one of the best tele zooms

The 24-70 2.8 is my standard lens for weddings and events, buy one now, you won't be disappointed. I agree with iris chrome and Rx4Photo, not sure I've ever wished it had VR.

The question is are you willing to wait and hold off all the way until march for a lens that may or may not be released then? The 24-70 does not even need VR so even if you buy the current one you really wouldn't need to upgrade when it gets updated.

That and what Rx4 said about price.

I don't think anyone knows. But, something to think about...look at the price difference from the older Nikkor 80-200mm F2.8 to the 70-200mm F2.8 VR1 to the new 70-200mm VR2. With that trend established you'd likely have to pony up much more than you expect for a 24-70mm F2.8 VR lens. Some of my best photos have been taken with my 24-70 and I've never wished it had VR.

I love my 24-70 2.8! I say buy it now. Last year I was in the same boat as you, and the guys here convinved me to get it. Couldn't be happier.

If you really want the lense, do yourself a favor and buy the lense already. When the update is out, you can always upgrade (maybe next year, maybe 5 more years, who knows).