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!

28-70 F2.8 or 24-70 F2.8

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by gmaker1, Aug 17, 2008.

  1. Any opinions on these two lenses besides the obvious? Looking to purchase one but don't know which. Looking for opinions.

    Gil
     
  2. I have the 28-70 2.8, and just love it. I've never used a 24-70, but I have read numerous times that it's less flattering for portraits because of it's *super sharpness* and has less accurate skin tones. That was the reason for my decision to get the 28-70.
     
  3. Michael

    Michael

    300
    Jun 30, 2005
    Mid-Michigan
    Never used the 24-70, only read rave reviews. I do have the 28-70 and it never leaves my camera. I think it's a terrific lens!
     
  4. I have the 28-70 and I love it so far. I only got it a few months ago.
    The only thing I don't like is that its not as wide as I'd like, so the 24mm would be nice, but for the money I saved I can just throw on my wide angle lens instead.

    I'd recommend 28-70.
     
  5. Jaws

    Jaws

    Mar 27, 2007
    Columbia, MD
    I have the 28-70 and so far am pleased with it, but I haven't used it enough to make a real good opinion of it. I did play around with a 24-70 mounted on a D700 with the vertical grip at a local camera store recently and I liked the size of the 24-70 over the 28-70. The 28-70 is a fat lens, whereas the 24-70 is a little thinner. I found the 24-70 nicer to hold due to it being a little thinner.

    The lens hood on the 24-70 didn't seem to be as big as the one on the 28-70, which may also be preferable to some.
     
  6. JDann24

    JDann24

    663
    Dec 15, 2007
    Garland, Texas
    I haven't had the pleasure of trying the 24-70, but I've been using the 28-70 for a few months now and absolutely love it! It gives great skin tones and good bokeh. I don't mind the weight at all and it has cool hood.
     
  7. Jaws

    Jaws

    Mar 27, 2007
    Columbia, MD
    I will second this as you can get a real nice used 28-70 for a fraction of the price of a new 24-70. Unless you need the additional focal length range on the wide lens, the 28-70 is a good choice.
     
  8. Doug

    Doug

    Jan 17, 2006
    East TN
    I would say everything said here is the truth. So, the answer is probably, "it depends". IT depends what you shoot, if you shoot landscapes, and outdoor things more, the 24-70 has the nano-coating and will likely be the better outdoor lens. Also sharper for detail. But less flattering skin tones than the prior 28-70. as other skin shooters said. That said, I'd someday like to have both back, I do miss the 28-70.
     
  9. I'd rather get the 28-70 if I can get it for a cheaper price. Before the 24-70, the 28-70 was the defacto short zoom in the Nikon line up. Either will do the job.
     
  10. The Ben

    The Ben

    604
    Oct 17, 2007
    Houston, Tx
    Well look who decided to join us. lol

    whats up sunshine?
     
  11. I have owned both and I can't see much difference between them, I guess if you are a pro and use them professionally the AFS 24-70mm f/2.8 will make a difference on the wide end. Why did I buy the AFS 24-70mm f/2.8? I guess because it was there the same answer that Sir Edmon Hillary gave for the reason why he climbed MT Everest. :wink:
     
  12. Everyone:

    Thanks for all the comments. I will be getting the 24-70 because I shoot landscapes and wildlife, not people.

    Thanks,
    Gil
     
  13. exitnine

    exitnine

    321
    Jun 5, 2008
    Boston, MA
    But I am thinking about to use the 24-70 f/2.8 is good for wedding too, right?wide angle, mid range len.

    Currently I still use 35-70 f/2.8, but once a while need to use 24 or 28, so I guess that 24-70 should be fit that situation.
     
  14. cobrakai

    cobrakai Guest

    I was pretty sure I was going to get the 24-70mm because of how sharp it was wide open at all focal lengths and just gets ridiculously sharp at f4. But then I found a 28-70mm at an amazing price and jumped on it. The images are not as sharp at f2.8 as the 24-70mm but the image have a very nice portrait quality to them and the best out of focus area I've seen from any standard f2.8 zoom even compared to the Minolta 28-70mm G lens which is less sharp than the Nikon.

    So basically what everyone here has said. 28-70mm for people and 24-70mm for landscape.
     
  15. Having owned both the "Beast" and the newer 24-70, I can't find anything to argue with here. Yes, I also think the skin tones are a little more pleasing on the beast, and the 24-70 is sharper, and does better outdoors. Both were acceptable to hold, even with the beast being a little thicker.
    SOOOO, heres another vote for what has become somewhat of a consensus... Beast for peeps, 24-70 for outdoors.
     
  16. rich_h

    rich_h

    113
    Oct 9, 2007
    Colorado
    I owned both for a while and just sold my 28-70. Both are great for portraits and just ok for landscape. The 24-70 has sharper edges and more contrast. Both are fairly sharp wide open (samples will vary). The main reasons to get the 24-70 are it is a little easier to carry around and is 4mm wider.

    Rich H
     
  17. Jonathan

    Jonathan

    676
    Jun 11, 2005
    Southern Maine
    I've owned and used both, and kept the 28-70 for the very reasons Sonya mentions above.

    To me it's an easy decision because the 28-70 will save you lots of money right now, and the 24-70 was not(imho) nearly as nice with skin tones.

    The one thing I really loved on the 24-70 was the surprising difference that extras 4mm made. If I shot more landscapes than portraits, I would have kept the 24-70.
     
  18. truflip

    truflip

    124
    Jul 28, 2008
    Ottawa, ON
    I want to rent one of these mid-range zooms..
    I can have the 24-70mm for the weekend for $36 + taxes and 28-70 for $28 + taxes.
    I'll be using it for a wedding so it'll mostly be portraits.

    I was thinking the 24-70mm would be the choice since its a bit thinner? and apparently sharper.
    However, I like hearing that the 28-70 is better for potraits. Is it just nearly as sharp?
    I'm not getting paid that much for this wedding so trying to cut unnecessary spending a little bit :) 
     
  19. If you're renting just get the 24-70. It's not like you're spending money to buy one!

     
  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.