Nikon 24-70 or 28-70

Nikon 24-70 or 28-70?

  • Nikon 24-70

    Votes: 46 85.2%
  • Nikon 28-70

    Votes: 8 14.8%

  • Total voters
    54
  • Poll closed .
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
676
Location
Southern Maine
Sometimes a poll is not only fun but also helps see what we think about certain lenses. This one is tough because both are just super lenses.

I'm hoping to get input from those who have used both extensively, which should be no problem because sooo many people went from the "beast" to the 24-70.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
749
Location
Milton, Ontario, Canada
I clicked on this poll before reading it, sorry. I have the 28-70 and simply can't imagine how the 24-70 could be better. I've read many many threads with as many unhappy people complaining about the 24-70 as those who love it. To me, the extra 4mm isn't worth an upgrade, I love the beast and will NEVER part with her, it, er.....this lens.

AM
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,456
Location
Sydney, Oz
had both; the 24-70 is better at larger apertures but its not MUCH better as some would lead you to believe. stopped down they are not much different at all. if i had my time again i'd probably keep the 28-70 and pocket the money. on a purely subjective note...i found that the 28-70 felt more comfortable to hold and shoot with. the 24-70 to me feels unbalanced and is a real PITA to use in all honesty.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,291
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
they are almost indistinguishable in IQ IMO but the 24-70 is 24 vs 28 and IMO handles way better (longer and thinner is better to me) with a much smoother zoom ring.....and mine was only $1300 new so I had to get it
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
2,522
Location
Kansas, USA. Near the end of the world
I suggest some that scream the 28-70 is better may have not actually used the 24-70 to compare. I owned both for several months. After using the 24-70 for a couple months I tried the 28-70 again. I my opinion the 24-70 is absolutely a better lens, (for me). I could see the difference in contrast, sharpness, flare control and AF speed. The 24-70 AF is very fast and is very near silent when focusing. When I started using the 28-70 again, I really missed the 24-70 and went back to it.
However I like the build of the 28-70 and I like aperture rings, even if I don't use them. I bought the lens soon after Nikon introduced it (can't recall exactly, somewhere around 2001) and made thousands upon thousands of snaps with it. But it now gone, happily replaced place by the 24-70.
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
2,156
Location
Queens, NY
I purchased a used 28-70mm in lieu of the 24-70mm due to the price (too good to pass up), which yielded me a savings about another $900.00 in my pocket (which I'm saving for a D700). I can't complain about the D300 and 28-70mm combination as well.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
1,822
Location
Rural Virginia
My 28-70 always felt bulky and unwieldy, but produced superb images. My 24-70 also produces superb images, but handles much better. You really can't go wrong with either.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
2,116
Location
Canada
The diameter of the beast really bothered me; ergonomically the 24-70/2.8 works much better for me.

Some other advantages of the new lens that make it the preferred lens for me:
I wanted the wider 24mm field of view, because I didn't intend on an ultrawide lens for now.
Flare control is superior.
Wide open performance is stellar.
I liked the look of the smoother bokeh.

I was impressed with new lens as soon as I snapped a few test shots.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
530
Location
MD
hoping to hear some more opinions! comparison shots?
the 28-70 is definitely cheaper

trying to pick out my lenses for when i go FX
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
2,546
Location
Denmark
Some says, that the 28-70 make better skin tones, but I like that the 24-70 is better in the flare/ghosting area.

I am very happy with my 24-70, even it could be better at 24 mm - some field curvature for landscape pics if you go close, but it is gone at about 28 mm (there you are:smile:), and maybe it is a matter of where you focus to work around it - have not learned it yet - if there is something to learn:smile:

Both lenses are very fine.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
976
Location
chicago
As much as I'd love to have a 24-70, I couldn't bear to part with my 28-70, which is the only way my Wife would allow me to do it!

Now if Nikon came out with a 24-120 f/2.8 that wouldn't require a truck bed for a tripod mount, I could see myself parting with the 28-70!
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2008
Messages
2,075
Location
San Diego, CA
I owned the 28-70 for about a year, and I switched to the 24-70 before my trip to Europe about 4 months ago. While in Europe, I probably took about 8000 photos with my 24-70 attached, so I've used both pretty extensively.

For my particular copies, the 24-70 focuses slightly faster and more accurately. It renders skin tones more accurately, focuses closer (great for flower shots), and IMO it is a good bit sharper @2.8-3.5 than the 28-70. By f/4 they are both tack sharp!

The main reason I switched was to reduce some weight in my bag that I would be carrying all over the place, but these other advantages came with it.

I don't regret my upgrade at all! Having the Extra 4mm on the wide end really helps me out as well, since I can't use filters on my 14-24mm.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom