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!

I did it again Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G AF-S Lens

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by smodak, Jul 12, 2008.

  1. smodak


    Jun 11, 2007
    Franklin MA US
    :Just ordered a minty 24-85 AF-S f/3.3-5.6 from ebay to be used on my future D700. Anybody used this lens? Any comments???
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 17, 2008
  2. photolizard


    Mar 22, 2008
    I bought one off ebay a week or so ago. Just started playing with it. Sharpness seems fine. I don't know if it is any sharper than my copy of the 18-200, but I will be checking on that. It's small and light, but feels a little cheaper than I was expecting. I like that it stays at f/3.3 for quite a bit through the zoom range.
    No pics yet. For lens tests I like to use the 1 button conversion in NX and it locked up on me!!
  3. I have one for the same reason. It's a decent lens but nothing special. My 18-135 beats it for sharpness, although the 24-85's bokeh is better.
  4. I bought one off of Ebay about a year ago. I've used it as my walk-around lens since. It is sharp and is light enough for general use.

  5. I have a question about the "thought process" regarding your purchase.

    Please do not take offense. We all want to see our members, get the most out of their investment.

    24-85 on FF camera is 24-85.
    The lens is not one of Nikon's finer lenses, and the results should be comparable to any DX lens that you would have put on the D300.

    16-85VR on the D300 would give you a 24-127VR
    17-55 would give you a 25-82 on the D300.

    Why are you buying a D700,..... to use the 24-85 f3.3-f3.6?
  6. as anthony said above
    no offense... but, why on earth would you buy THAT lens to go with a D700?
    if you are going to spend the money for that body... i'd remember the "chain is only as strong as the weakest link" cliché

    again.... no offense... but, that D700 deserves better glass to fully take advantage of its IQ
  7. smodak


    Jun 11, 2007
    Franklin MA US
    I have all the good pro lenses (28-70, 70-200 vr etc., primes) to use on D700 but I wanted something smaller and lighter for everyday use. That is the reason. Considering the high ISo capabilities of D700, I can use slower lenses. The 24-85 got excellent reviews from Thom and BJorn and does not break the bank (or the back ;) ).

    I have good DX lenses (17-55) as well.. but I do not see the D300 as a "worthy" upgrade to my D200/D2H/S5. I never wanted to buy a D300 but D700 I pre-ordered the firat day....
  8. smodak


    Jun 11, 2007
    Franklin MA US
    Actually full frame cameras with higher pixel density is much more forgiving for lenses. For my reasoning see...reply to Anthony's post.
  9. I really like this lens, it's light, very sharp and the AF-S is super quick and silent...
    I love the IQ it gives, although I have only used it on my D80 & D300 and can't comment on how it will perform on a FX sensor.

    It is better at the long end (even wide open) but still works really well at the short end.
    Although I use the 28-70 f/2.8 most of the time, but the shear mass of it makes me use the 24-85 when I need a light weight option...

    Anyway, you've bought it, and now just try it and make up your own mind if its good enough for you.
    But I know won't be getting rid of mine for a long time, it's just too good IMHO....:smile:
  10. i do understand your point
    and, again, i mean you no disrespect
    but... my point to you
    use the fastest glass you own
    it might weigh more
    but... having better low-light capability isn't an excuse to use slower (and, therefore lower quality) glass

    carry the extra ounces and get the most out of your investment
    if you are going to spring for the D700... then make it happy by letting it "connect" with the best glass you have to offer it.. :smile:
  11. smodak


    Jun 11, 2007
    Franklin MA US
    I think I am also gonna have fun with my 28-200 G too on my D700 ;) 
  12. Gary Mayo

    Gary Mayo Guest

    I remember telling someone on DPReview I wanted to try a 18-200mm VR on my D3 when it comes in. Some guy named Anthony ( I dearly hope that is no kin of yours) tried his best to hand me my own as#.

    Well I have been pleased with the results I have gotten with a DX lens on my D3. I say try stuff till you get the results you want.
  13. If you give me a choice between the 24-85 and the 18-70 I pick the 18-70 any day.
    Just my opinion.
    William Rodriguez
    Miami, Florida.
  14. I can clearly understand your reasoning.
    On the flip side, many of us spend lots of money on fast glass, only to use them stopped down in bright light, anyway.

    I used to have the Canon 24-85 on my Canon 5D. It too, was my lightweight option.
    But I always wondered how much nicer that "keeper" I took that day, would have been if I had taken it with my 24-70 f2.8:biggrin:

    OH, the tangled web we weave!!
  15. i'll look forward to your images with that lens
    again... i'm sorry if i offended you... i meant not to
  16. smodak


    Jun 11, 2007
    Franklin MA US
    No problem Man...I was just having some fun!!! I do respect and understand what you mean...that is why I bought good glass in the first place...
  17. smodak


    Jun 11, 2007
    Franklin MA US
  18. I spent some time on this question

    When I got my D3 I wondered wether I had to get a 28-70 or a 24-70. The 28-70 isn't quite wide enough to get the the same range as the 17-55mm on DX so I skipped on that option. The 24-70 is from my tries in the store a superb lens, and everyone says so as well. But it is not cheap. And since I dont do much people photography and have the 17-35 for lanscapes and really wide shots, I didn't feel that I needed (to pay for) a 24-70mm.

    So I set out to test what is out there in these ranges:

    * I already had a 28-105mm. It is a bit soft, pretty much over the whole range, but surpsingly good macro function. 28mm is not wide enough at the wide end I think.

    * 24-85mm AF-S G, Much sharper wide open but has a fair amount of CA at least my copy, does well with controlled lighting like flash and portraits.

    * 24-120mm VR, fantastic range and easy to carry around, VR works pretty well. The problem with this lens is that at the wider zoom range it is very soft wide open, and only decent at F8-F11. It has a fair amount of linear distortion at the wider zoom range. Bent horizons does not make for a great landscape lens although you can of course correct in PS...It does much better at 80-120mm in sharpness but is still soft wide open. CA is reasonably well controlled.

    I have not tried the Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF AF Macro, some people swear by it others are not that impressed, anyone care to comment?

    My summary is I wish I liked the 24-120 IQ better, range is ideal, I wish that Nikon would come out with a better version of this lens say F4 constant and sharp wide open and better controlled linear distortion at 24mm. That would be a true bread and butter lens for the D3 and D700.
  19. Pete


    Jun 10, 2006
    Denver, CO
    Some of us shoot zooms and look for the best qualities we can get in the pro glass. Those shooters often carry a 50 1.8 or 35 f2 for low light or when they need a fast prime. Others shoot primes picking each one for its special charachter (85 1.4, Noct, 28 1.4, etc) but sometimes need a small zoom for some situations. I am in the second catagory with Smodak and hope to be able to find a 24-85 AFS for my D700. Please keep quiet about this lens until I get mine...
  20. smodak


    Jun 11, 2007
    Franklin MA US
    I know what you mean :biggrin:
  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.