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!

Advice requested before I buy - 24-85mm

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by GaryW, Oct 27, 2005.

  1. GaryW

    GaryW Guest

    From what I have read, it seems that the 24mm-85mm f2.8 has a sharpness issue, while the 24mm-85mm f3.5 is a very sharp lens.

    Does anyone have experience with both lenses, or if only one, can you verify or rebut the above statement?

  2. Gary, from what I have read the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 is a much better lens. Ken Rockwell has a review of both on his site, http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2485afs.htm. If you are thinking of the 3.5-4.5 I have one for sale in mint condition.
  3. GaryW

    GaryW Guest

    Scott, e-mail me about the lens. garywillson at swbell.net


  4. JMartin

    JMartin Guest

    This is what I was told when I asked before. I have the 24mm-85mm f3.5, but was thinking of selling it to get the the 2.8 version. Now I am holding on to mine until I decide I want to part with the money on a 17-35 2.8 and 28-70 2.8... which may be very soon, the LLD is getting uncontrolable!
  5. I've had the 3.5-4.5 for a couple of years and have been quite pleased with it. Tough to beat for the money. Very fast and accurate focusing on my D100 and with an N80 before that. A couple of cautions, though, the build quality isn't on par with the pro lenses. There have been numerous reports of dust getting inside. I've had no problems, but am careful when and where I use mine. Secondly, it takes 67mm filters. A 67-77 stepping ring solves that problem. All in all, I think it's a good value. Hope this helps.
  6. I've also had the 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 for a couple of years, and I love it for its colour "pop" and rendition of blue skies (probably helped by the ED element).

    However, I totally agree with Brian's caution regarding its non-pro build. My particular sample has been to Melville twice for dust removal and has had one tightening of the barrel so that it wouldn't rattle so much. Last time the lens had somehow attracted a quarter-inch-long red wool fiber onto its back element from who knows where since I don't own anything in red wool!

    Currently, sigh, the focal length ring is broken somewhere inside, and now the poor lens is stuck on about 75mm unless given a gentle shake whereupon it gets stuck over on about 35mm.

    BUT I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU OFF THIS LENS :~}. Mine is probably just a slightly wacko sample. As I have written in other posts elsewhere "I am unreasonably fond of this Old Dust Magnet". So much so that I am still using it, and I am going to have it repaired.

    The 3.5-4.5 is a lot quieter(AFS) than the 2.8-4.0 which does NOT have a silent motor. As I recall there is not too much difference in weight. Do note that the 2.8-4.0 has more mag power and about a 1-foot minimum focus distance (better look that up, I can't quite remember...). I didn't notice anything obvious about the 2.8-4.0's sharpness, but I was only trying it for a few shots and decided to purchase the 3.5-4.5 instead.

    Hope this helps! Cheers -- Anne Di.
  7. GaryW

    GaryW Guest

    Thanks for all of the info, folks. I probably should just keep my 35-105mm, but I have already promised to sell it to a friend.

    So, I am buying Scott's 24-85mm.
  8. I have used a 24-85 G AFs 3.5 on a D100 for over three years and have been very happy with it. I briefly tried the 24-85 D 2.8 because I thought that I might benefit from it's lower light capability. To me it wasn't worth the difference especially considering that it's not an AFs lens. I am happy with the focus speed and sharpness of the 24-85 G. I might move up to something but not the 24-85 D.


  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.