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!

Nikon 24-70mm f.2.8 VR version question

Discussion in 'General Technical Discussion' started by barry lloyd, Sep 13, 2018.

  1. barry lloyd

    barry lloyd

    Jun 12, 2007
    UK
    This morning I had to take my nikon 24-70mm f2.8mm non VR lens in to have some work done on it as the hood retaining bar had broken on one side. So i asked the service engineer what he thought about the new VR version and I had a surprise.

    he said they have had several in for repair for the same fault , something to do with the electronic motor He was saying that a drive was locking up due to a magnet which was affecting something to do with the electronics. I was considering buying one but not after what he was saying about the problem , expensive to fix/replace

    Sorry to be a bit vague but I just wondered if anyone else had heard of this. He also mentioned the new VR version wasn't as good as the previous version ie not as sharp and vignetting
     
  2. Barry - I couldn't find anything on the lens reliability but this seemed to be a pretty objective review on its optical performance: Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E VR Review - Photography Life

    As I recall, Thom Hogan came to the same conclusions about its optical performance. You can check out his review at the following link: Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E AF-S VR Lens Review | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan

    Now, hopefully, a few folks will weigh in on its reliability and the results they have gotten from using it in the field.

    I've got the old 24-70 and decided not to get the new one. I wasn't put off by the changes they made in its optical performance but the current lens is already large and heavy and I didn't want to replace it with one that had even more size and heft.

    I hope that this information is somewhat helpful.
     
  3. barry lloyd

    barry lloyd

    Jun 12, 2007
    UK
    thank you for the link
    i did see this in it

    quote " I would still take extra precautions when switching between drastically different weather conditions. For example, if you shoot in extreme cold, make sure not to bring the lens to very warm conditions right away, as it will build up condensation and possibly introduce moisture inside the lens." unquote

    i wonder if this is what he engineer found out which cause an electrical fault causing the drive motors to fail?

    My 24-70 g lens I am very happy with so not going to upgrade in the near future. it will be nice to get it back as good as new .
    The hood retaining"lip" in the photo was the part that broke when it got dropped
    MVfNPHo.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


    So the whole ring needs replacing. The engineer did say it might have caused a bit of movement restriction he could just about feel, but it didn't have any effect on the use of the lens.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2018
  4. barry lloyd

    barry lloyd

    Jun 12, 2007
    UK
    Yes i did see the article, although not understanding all of it I came to the conclusion there was insufficient difference (in the test charts) to warrant an upgrade, apart from having VR being realistic how much improvement can actually be achieved?
    We all know manufactures of any product have to "tinker" with what is already a good product to keep sales up. If a product was good enough originally then why should buyers update?
     
  5. I don't have either lens, but 3 things that stood out to me in Roger's testing, besides the advantage of VR, are:

    At 70mm there is no question the new lens (left) is significantly better than the old version (right). At 10 and 20 line pairs it clearly has higher MTF, even in the center of the image. Off center, it’s dramatically better at all frequencies.

    So in the center 1/3 of the image, the old lens had better MTF results, but across the remainder of the field the newer lens is far superior. Not just that the resolution is better, but there is very little astigmatism, which the old lens had in spades.

    And it also tells you that this lens has been designed to be about things other than absolute resolution. It’s about having a flat field with very equal sharpness from side-to-side, and fairly equal sharpness throughout the zoom range.
     
  6. TANG0F0XTR0T

    TANG0F0XTR0T

    842
    Jun 4, 2008
    UK
    I have not experienced or even heard about the motor issue but I can comment on the sharpness and overall rendition of the pictures.

    The review makes some sense to me as I see what is showing up in the tests. Is the VR sharp in the centre? Absolutely. Is the G version sharper, maybe a little but nothing I've noticed as I used to own it. The tests state otherwise but again, I can't see it in what I edit.

    The tests state the edge sharpness is improved and this is more noticeable. Vignetting? I don't see vignetting and the tests also don't state that it exists. Not sure why the repair person made these comments.

    The 3 biggest improvements to me on this lens is are the VR, overall rendition of the photo, and focus acquisition speed. The rendition of the photo is noticeable. It just has a look to it that looks better to me. It's crisper and the crisp look could be the improved corner sharpness. The focus acquisition is definitely faster than the G version. The G wasn't bad at all but it is noticeable on the VR version. Lastly, the VR itself is really good. On high resolution D810's and D850's, it is very helpful as it stabilises at lower f-stops. It saves you on these higher resolution cameras which very much like to show our flaws in technique, etc.

    My opinion? The new VR is better than the old G but I'm not sure it is worth upgrading unless you need VR and like landscapes more than portraits. The downside is it is heavier (very noticeable) and definitely bigger. This is a deal breaker for some and I understand. It is almost as big as my 70-200 FL E VR!!!!
     
  7. But upgrading from a 24-120/4 I’m leaning towards the VR version of the 24-70
     
  8. TANG0F0XTR0T

    TANG0F0XTR0T

    842
    Jun 4, 2008
    UK
    For this scenario I’d definitely go VR. Just make sure you are ok with the size and weight.
     
  9. barry lloyd

    barry lloyd

    Jun 12, 2007
    UK
    Have to say I too would go for the VR version if I had not got the G version. To sell it and do the upgrade financially is not worth it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. TANG0F0XTR0T

    TANG0F0XTR0T

    842
    Jun 4, 2008
    UK
    I'd agree with this as well if you already have the G.
     
  11. barry lloyd

    barry lloyd

    Jun 12, 2007
    UK
    Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G ED lens

    Had a quote from Camserve ,local to me , of under £240 ( $314) including part- service -repair- labour and Vat. When I took it in the guy noticed/felt a bit of rubbing when the lens moved in/out. Not enough for me to notice but then again one get used to how a lens feels. I think this is very reasonable considering the value of this lens replacement is over £1300. ($1444)

    What do you think repair cost wise, bearing in mine the strip down starts from the other end that attaches to the camera
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2018
  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.