1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

18-70 vs. 24-85

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by JustinD, Jul 15, 2005.

  1. I'm thinking about picking up the Nikkor 24-85mm lens and selling the 18-70mm that I got with my D70.

    I've been reading some reviews and it seems that the 24-85 AF-S lens is a pretty good low priced choice. Thom Hogan seemed to like it as well (if that counts for anything..)

    Does anyone have any thoughts on the 24-85? Would it be a good alternative to the respectable 18-70?

    Or should I just stay with the "kit" lens I have now...

    Any suggestions or help deciding would be appreciated. :) 
  2. Justin,
    The 24-85 is a very good lens. I have one for sale on ebay if you're interested. It's a very sharp lens, but I'm selling it to raise the cash for a 28-70.

    Lens Item number: 7530475156
  3. Hi Justin,
    I have both of these fine lenses. I also have two bodies (D-70 & D-100). I find that I like the 18-70 when I have both cameras or a single camera and two lenses (the second being a telephoto). However when I am going to take just a single camera and one lens, like for a walk around a city I am visiting, I usually opt for the 24-85.
    I know this does not help, but depending on what your shooting style and subjects are, you either need the 24-85 or keep the 18-70 and add something like the 70-300G or ED (or a top line lens like the 70-200AFS-VR if that is in your budget)
  4. faenix


    Jun 21, 2005
    Bayside, NY
    I was under the notion that the 18-70 and 24-85 were basically similar lenses with the slight difference in mm? Am I wrong to assume that?
  5. MikeG


    Apr 30, 2005
    SF Bay Area
    You're quite correct.

    About the same comparison as the 17-55 v. the 28-70.

    Both are capable performers.
  6. faenix


    Jun 21, 2005
    Bayside, NY
    Perfect, my assumtion wasn't wrong. Thanks Mike!
  7. eheffa

    eheffa Guest

    18-70 vs 24-85

    In my 2 samples, the 18-70 is a better lens at all focal lengths esp at the wider end.... less CA & sharper.

    My 24-85AFS did have a nice long end & at times I miss that extra reach but generally the 24-85 stays in the bag at home now.

    The problem with this sort of feedback is that it is not statistically valid as my 2 samples may be significantly different from any other samples out there. Your experience could be the exact opposite but in my case it's no contest.

  8. Hey Evan,

    Thanks for taking the time to post that. I've decided not to change the 18-70 for the 24-85. Doesn't make much sense.

    Now I want a macro lens and some kind of telephoto. Any suggestions?

    I've been looking at the Sigma 90mm...
  9. Tosh


    May 6, 2005

    If you can find one and afford it, the Nikon 70-180 micro is a great lens for macro and mid-range telephoto. It's considered second only to the Nikon 70-200 and 80-200 in that telezoom range. However, it's not the ideal sports/fast action lens if that's one of your primary, intended uses.

    Here are some reviews. http://www.bythom.com/70180Macrolens.htm

    Here is someone selling their mint, US model with Kirk QR plate for $750 shipped. Very reasonable price if the lens is as advertised. http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one.tcl?classified_ad_id=619532

    I have a 70-180 and love it.

  10. Hey Glenn,

    I hadn't even considered this lens. Thanks for pointing it out to me!
  11. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    Like the 200-400 AIS, the 70-180 Micro-Nikkor seems to be a lens becoming eagerly sought after and regarded higher as time goes by, since more people discover just how good this lens is. Since neither the 200-400(AIS) nor the 70-180 became popular during their initial production run, Nikon discontinued them quickly (well, the 200-400 anyway).

    I tend to use my 70-180 as a general-purpose lens for close-ups. It has significant advantages for this purpose because of its zooming capability which allows effortless framing of the subject without a need for moving the tripod. The 70-180 is also unique in not losing any light when when it is focused closer. Thus, although f/4.5-5.6 might not seem to fast and exciting, these values still apply at closest focus where other lenses lose up to 2 stops.

    However, I don't consider it a good performer for landscape type of work and to this end I much prefer my 200/2 VR. The 200 VR is probably the sharpest medium focal length lens ever made by Nikon.
  12. Przemek

    Przemek Guest

    I own both of these lenses actually by a fluke of incidents.

    I would say don't buy the 24-85mm AF-S now that you already own the 18-70mm. They are quite close and the 24-85mm is not a good upgrade step.

    If someone did not own either of them though, I would recommend they get the 24-85mm. I appears slightly sharper at the tele end, at least my sample, and does not vignette because it's a full frame lens (obviously).

    Right now, just start saving up for a professional Nikkor to upgrade from the 18-70mm

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.