Nikon 24-70 VR

[Randy]

I need a basketball lens and a better LS lens for my D850.
Is the 24-70 VR as good as it sounds ?

 

[Geof]

I'm surprised no one has posted here.

My experience with the New 24-70E is positive. I had long ago sold the G version and picked up the 24-120 but when I bought the D850 I "turned in" my 24-120 for the 24-70e. This is a bigger and heavier lens than the 24-120 and obviously focal length challenged but IMO it is way sharper towards the edges and it really AF's quickly and accurately on my D850. The images seem more pleasing using the 24-70e as compared to the 24-120 and I'm thinking it's because of better micro contrast (but I'm not a lens reviewer). I don't care for the 82mm filter diameter and there are numerous reports that the E version is less sharp in the center than the G version but I don't have any issue with it's sharpness (evidently Nikon gave up some central sharpness for better edge performance). I think it makes a great Landscape lens but I have no experience shooting BB.

 

[RoyC01]

I need a basketball lens and a better LS lens for my D850.
Is the 24-70 VR as good as it sounds ?

Yes, the new 24-70 E is as good as it sounds. The new 24-70/70-200 E glass is so good that except for a specific need for f1.4 glass or a specific need for a light f1.8 glass, primes in that FL range, IMHO, are not needed. The 24-70 E is my landscape lens for YNP and the Grand Tetons. Paired with the D850 I like it a lot. Here is a D850 + 24-70 E shot of an old school house. No crop and just a LR auto present for you to see detail across the frame and vignetting.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Luke_Miller]

I have the first version and considered moving to the new version to get the benefit of VR. But reviews of the latest version led me to keep my current model. According to trusted reviewers the new version is in all respects, save one, superior to the older version. The VR version is sharper across the frame, and so better for landscapes and other shots where sharpness outside the center is important. But it is less sharp in the center, which is where I live.

So for my use the older model is the better choice, but for a landscape shooter the opposite would be true.

 

[RoyC01]

I have the first version and considered moving to the new version to get the benefit of VR. But reviews of the latest version led me to keep my current model. According to trusted reviewers the new version is in all respects, save one, superior to the older version. The VR version is sharper across the frame, and so better for landscapes and other shots where sharpness outside the center is important. But it is less sharp in the center, which is where I live.

So for my use the older model is the better choice, but for a landscape shooter the opposite would be true.

True the G is sharper in the center but the mid and corners are where the E shines. At some f stops the E is almost 50% sharper in the corners than the G. Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E VR Review - Lens Comparisons (Page 3 of 6) as an example.

 

[Geof]

Yes, the new 24-70 E is as good as it sounds. The new 24-70/70-200 E glass is so good that except for a specific need for f1.4 glass or a specific need for a light f1.8 glass, primes in that FL range, IMHO, are not needed.

I have the 70-200E as well and totally agree with this.

But, I'm going to be anxious to see how the Z mount S-series lenses compare when they become available.

 

[Randy]

I'm surprised no one has posted here.

My experience with the New 24-70E is positive. I had long ago sold the G version and picked up the 24-120 but when I bought the D850 I "turned in" my 24-120 for the 24-70e. This is a bigger and heavier lens than the 24-120 and obviously focal length challenged but IMO it is way sharper towards the edges and it really AF's quickly and accurately on my D850. The images seem more pleasing using the 24-70e as compared to the 24-120 and I'm thinking it's because of better micro contrast (but I'm not a lens reviewer). I don't care for the 82mm filter diameter and there are numerous reports that the E version is less sharp in the center than the G version but I don't have any issue with it's sharpness (evidently Nikon gave up some central sharpness for better edge performance). I think it makes a great Landscape lens but I have no experience shooting BB.

our stories are identical
thanks for your post it was perfect for me

 

[Randy]

Yes, the new 24-70 E is as good as it sounds. The new 24-70/70-200 E glass is so good that except for a specific need for f1.4 glass or a specific need for a light f1.8 glass, primes in that FL range, IMHO, are not needed. The 24-70 E is my landscape lens for YNP and the Grand Tetons. Paired with the D850 I like it a lot. Here is a D850 + 24-70 E shot of an old school house. No crop and just a LR auto present for you to see detail across the frame and vignetting.
View attachment 1621399

great shot
I don't want to use my 24-120 anymore for LS now that I have a D850 so this is perfect
and the increased AF speed is perfect for BB. So the D5 and D850 will be happy

 

[Randy]

I have the first version and considered moving to the new version to get the benefit of VR. But reviews of the latest version led me to keep my current model. According to trusted reviewers the new version is in all respects, save one, superior to the older version. The VR version is sharper across the frame, and so better for landscapes and other shots where sharpness outside the center is important. But it is less sharp in the center, which is where I live.

So for my use the older model is the better choice, but for a landscape shooter the opposite would be true.

for BB center sharpness matters but I don't think it will be a problem...anyway I sold my 24-70 G years ago in favor of a 24-120 so any 24-70 will look better to me

 

[atlanta_man]

Anything bigger than my 24-120 would be just too much for me. I'll live with its minor deficiencies.

 

[rick_reno]

I thought about moving to the new one, the sharpness reports and the 82mm filters kept me from buying.

 

[Randy]

I thought about moving to the new one, the sharpness reports and the 82mm filters kept me from buying.

for me 82mm means I spend $60 on a Lee 82mm adaptor and I'm done.

 

[Geof]

for me 82mm means I spend $60 on a Lee 82mm adaptor and I'm done.

Same here, tho I did break down and buy a 82mm CPol.

 

[nuclearjock]

for me 82mm means I spend $60 on a Lee 82mm adaptor and I'm done.

To adapt to what filter size?

 

[Randy]

Same here, tho I did break down and buy a 82mm CPol.

I got the Lee CPL when I bought the Lee stuff, pricy but you only buy once.

To adapt to what filter size?

It’s called The Lee Foundation Kit, it fits on the adaptor, the adapter goes on the end of the lens. Lee filters slide into The Foundation Kit. So everything stays the same but the adaptor

 

[nuclearjock]

It’s called The Lee Foundation Kit, it fits on the adaptor, the adapter goes on the end of the lens. Lee filters slide into The Foundation Kit. So everything stays the same but the adaptor

Got it.

 

[Geof]

I got the Lee CPL when I bought the Lee stuff, pricy but you only buy once.

Someday I may get the Lee CPL but I do like the portability of the 82mm filter.
If you pickup the 24-70e please let us know how you like it.

 

[rick_reno]

I got the Lee CPL when I bought the Lee stuff, pricy but you only buy once.


It’s called The Lee Foundation Kit, it fits on the adaptor, the adapter goes on the end of the lens. Lee filters slide into The Foundation Kit. So everything stays the same but the adaptor

Thanks, was wondering how that worked.