Talk me out of getting Nikon 24-70mm 2.8.

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon Lenses

Talk me out of getting Nikon 24-70mm 2.8.

(60 posts) (24 voices)

Tags:

24-70mm

« Previous 123 Next »

NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

jonnyapple said:
That's what's keeping me from it, NSX.

Haha, I wish that was what's keeping me from that lens. That would mean I'd be able to afford it.

My other excuse is that it's a weird focal length for DX. :D

poster said:
Nice. I have talked myself out of buying it. I guess I am just scared of having the NAS, I would have all of this gear but still not making any money off it.

Yeah I will wait. Maybe invest in US stock market, become super rich, buy you guys a round of lenses on me lol.

What's a NAS? Hard drive space?

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

NAS = Nikon Acquisition Syndrome. The DSM-IV defines NAS as a mental illness that compels you to constantly buy every Nikon camera, lens, and accessory you come across.

Posted 2 years ago #
Willis

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 1,123
offline

The 24-70 is an amazing lens, unless you drop it like I did mine. Then its kind of a crap lens until you get it fixed.

The only reason NOT to use this lens is that it can still get a little cramped in tight spaces on DX. That said, if you can take a step or two back then you'll probably be able to frame most shots. Better yet, forget stepping back and just lug around 14-24 for those moments you are needing something a bit wider :)

For event work, the 24-70 is a rockstar. While its been in the shop, we've been using the 35mm 1.8 and while its a great lens (and occasionally better than the 24-70), I'm glad to have the 24-70 back. The 35 is going back to its regular home on my D40.

In all seriousness, unless you have the patience to wait around for its successor, this is THE lens to have for shooting in unpredictable situations. It outclasses every other zoom nikon has in that zoom range, and is much more flexible than shooting with primes.

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Hey Willis did they takecare of you at Havel or did you mail it to Nikon after all?

Posted 2 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

NikoDoby said:
NAS = Nikon Acquisition Syndrome. The DSM-IV defines NAS as a mental illness that compels you to constantly buy every Nikon camera, lens, and accessory you come across.

Ah okay.

Willis said:
The 24-70 is an amazing lens, unless you drop it like I did mine. Then its kind of a crap lens until you get it fixed.

The only reason NOT to use this lens is that it can still get a little cramped in tight spaces on DX. That said, if you can take a step or two back then you'll probably be able to frame most shots. Better yet, forget stepping back and just lug around 14-24 for those moments you are needing something a bit wider :)

For event work, the 24-70 is a rockstar. While its been in the shop, we've been using the 35mm 1.8 and while its a great lens (and occasionally better than the 24-70), I'm glad to have the 24-70 back. The 35 is going back to its regular home on my D40.

In all seriousness, unless you have the patience to wait around for its successor, this is THE lens to have for shooting in unpredictable situations. It outclasses every other zoom nikon has in that zoom range, and is much more flexible than shooting with primes.

I had a feeling it'd be weird. 35mm on DX isn't wide enough for me. I need something wider than 18. 24 isn't going to cut it.

Yeah, it's not truly wide nor can it truly reach anything long. It is a weird focal length on DX. At least 24 is truly wider than 18 is on FX.

Posted 2 years ago #
Rockness

member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 13
offline

I use D90 and 24-70/2.8 , going for D700 soon, but i usually have it hanging beside me in a Black Rapid RS4. If i want to shoot wideangle i use the 14-24/2.8.

The best about getting quality lenses from the start is when you go for FX you doesnt have to buy better lenses.

Posted 2 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

I don't find myself to be in midrange quite often. the best lens for me would be something that would go upto 24mm on DX. Something Like Tokina 12-24mm was awesome but the aperture was limiting me.

Like I said earlier, i already had doubts about buying the lens. That's why I said "talk me out of buying it". Truth is I don't really need it. I have lenses that cover this range well enough for me. I just didn't want to be stuck with changing three lenses a midst of an event, where one lens would suffice and excel.

I have decided that I will only upgrade to FX and get new lenses (14-24 and 24-70) if I start making money out of my gear that I already have. It's more than adequate to do so.
I have already invested quite a bit of money into the equipment,but I still haven't really made the jump to the next phase of moving from taking photography as a hobby to taking it more as a profession. Buying more gear won't help me in making that jump. So I do thank all of you for your suggestions and advice.

Posted 2 years ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

As mentioned on another current forum thread, why not try the 17-35mm which sits nicely between the 14-24mm and the 24-70mm.

Posted 2 years ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

It feels like it weighs 10 pounds when carrying it for awhile, but I love mine!

Posted 2 years ago #
shivaswrath

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 841
offline

kyoshinikon said:
As mentioned on another current forum thread, why not try the 17-35mm which sits nicely between the 14-24mm and the 24-70mm.

it's a bit wide on FX, and on DX, not as useful, no?

Posted 2 years ago #
Pierre

preferred member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 1,023
offline

kanuck said:
It feels like it weighs 10 pounds when carrying it for awhile, but I love mine!

Mounted on a D700, it feels more like 20, no wait, it is 20 pounds when I also bring my 70-200 VRII, SB-600 and the batteries, and I don't even count the tripod, which is kind of necessary.

I love this kit, great body-building machine :D

Posted 2 years ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

NikoDoby said:
NAS = Nikon Acquisition Syndrome. The DSM-IV defines NAS as a mental illness that compels you to constantly buy every Nikon camera, lens, and accessory you come across.

NAS I has dem...

I thought the 24-70mm or 80-200mm was heavy till I just acquired a 300mm f2.8. No need for benchpress anymore!

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

How do you think I got my washboard abs and athletic physique?

Posted 2 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

NikoDoby said:
How do you think I got my washboard abs and athletic physique?

Micro4/3

Posted 2 years ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

Who needs to work out, when you can carry a D300+grip and a 300mm prime around all day shooting? I'd rather shoot than go to the gym, any day of the week.

Posted 2 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Ha! Ha! good one Jonny ;^P

Posted 2 years ago #
smarterchild

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 678
offline

Lol

Posted 2 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

go for it poster, it's amazing lens on d200 - I'm using this combo for the last 2 years and I'm more than please with it

Posted 2 years ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

Yeah seriously! If you got a D700, SB whatever speedlight, god help you the MD-D10 battery pack, tripod tripod plate, and the 24-70 lens you are well over 10 pounds! Then add a tripod! When I was at the airport I weighted in at 19 pounds :( Thank god I don't have my Manfrotto anymore and got a Gitzo Carbon Fiber. Yes for sure, I owe Nikon for letting me do arm curls with their gear which has given me nice 16" biceps! haha The Nikon Complete Gym Workout...

Posted 2 years ago #
SkintBrit

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 1,149
offline

I didn't want to start a new thread and I remembered this "talk me out of" one from a while back. So:
As many of you know I shoot FF and have a selection of FF "G" lenses and SB900's. Please talk me out of buying in to film with a F100. Mint condition with grip, boxed with everything like it came out of the factory. Mine for £200 if I want it. Any super reason for getting back in to film?

Posted 1 year ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

SkintBrit said:
I didn't want to start a new thread

I think you should

Posted 1 year ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

No great reasons to get back into film. Is money an issue for you? If it is, I certainly wouldn't get it. But if I had the money, I'd be somewhat of a collector too.

Posted 1 year ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

I would... My last camera was a N80 and I love it to death... While film is kinda novel it keeps you in check as a photographer and it is just fun to use... the f100 is a superb camera too (I did not get paid to write this :P)

Posted 1 year ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Saturday, I shot the equivalent of 20 rolls of film, that would have cost about £130
(with out processing)

During the shoot, I was able to check the flash balance, focus, exposure and so on

The client saw the proofs less than half an hour later

An hour later they had selected the shots and I had finished the post production

Job done

Go back to film? you must be joking

Yes I could have done the job with just one role of film, and yes I could have processed it (in B&W ) in the same time, but the result would not have been anywhere near as good)

Posted 1 year ago #
SkintBrit

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 1,149
offline

You make a strong case for staying out seven :-) I just thought a spare emergency body for £200, and the fact that I would be able to use it without having to buy any new "hardware" sounded quite appealing?

Posted 1 year ago #