Would you keep your 24-70 f/4 S?

Joined
Apr 17, 2020
Messages
25
Location
Athens, Greece
Hi all,

I'm in a small dilemma lately. I recently acquired the 70-200 f/2.8 S and I'm super amazed by the image quality and build quality of this lens.

I also own the 24-70 f/4 S kit lens which I also find an amazing lens in terms of image and build quality. It doesn't feel cheap and plasticky at all to me as some have suggested.

However, being biased by the f/2.8 telephoto ,I am thinking that I also want to get the 24-70 f/2.8 S at some point, just because it is a better lens and will match my 70-200.

My question is, should I sell my 24-70 f/4 ? Currently, I have a hard time deciding to sell this lens. If the f/2.8 S didn't exist, the f/4 S would be the best Nikon 24-70 ever. Another thing that bothers me is that on the used market, its price is very low, around 400-500 euros, which is less than 1/4 of a new f/2.8 S. So, I am thinking that I would rather end up owning both the f/2.8 and the f/4 24-70 than selling the f/4 at 50% of its original price.

What do you think? Is the f/4 S valuable to keep if I also want to own the f/2.8 S?
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
551
Location
Viera, FL
If you will be traveling with the Z camera, you may want to hold on to the smaller, lighter lens. If the Z is not your travel camera and you want f/2.8, put the funds towards the big guns. YOLO!
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
814
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Depends.
If you are older, like me, I would rather carry a lighter lens all day, than a big heavy lens.
If I were 20 years younger, the weight of the 24-70/2.8 would not bother me.

If you have the funds, I would do as @tony-b said, keep it for your travel/light lens.
I have 2 sets of lenses, a light/travel kit and a heavier pro set. I chose the lens to use based on the shoot.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
814
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Do you need 2.8
As Randy said, do you?

I found that with a mirrorless, I do not need the fast lens to see in the viewfinder. The EVF adjusts to exposure level. So using a slower lens is not as difficult as it is with a dSLR/SLR. Heck sometimes it is easier to see in the EVF than with bare eyes. :D This is really neat about mirrorless.

I only shoot at f/2.8 on the field for high school night games, and in the gym. Other than those two locations, I can and do shoot with slower lenses. In fact, if I did not shoot high school sports, I might not have the f/2.8 zooms.

I think for many of us, the f/4 pro lenses are just right. Not as big, heavy and expensive as the f/2.8 lenses, and "good enough."
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
18,568
Location
Hong Kong
Real Name
Phil
I don't need F/2.8 most of the time, so F/4 is good enough for me and it's is lighter and smaller.

But if you do need the F/2.8, go for it. I would keep the F/4 in this case, as it comes in handy when you want to travel light.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2020
Messages
25
Location
Athens, Greece
Thank you very much to all of your for your inputs!

I agree with all and as I said on my first post, the f/4 produces excellent results and its a solid lens. To answer the question if I need the f/2.8, the reason I like this lens is the additional sharpness it provides plus the 2.8 aperture which can come handy when shooting indoors for lowering the ISO. In the comparison analysis I have seen the f/2.8 is also better in the corners even though the f/4 is already very good at corners. Coupled with a z7, I know that the f/2.8 will be the long-term best solution.

However, I think I will also keep the f/4 in my collection as it's a solid lens by itself. If I could sell it around 70-80% of its original new price it would be a good deal, but at or less than 50% is killing its fantastic value. Sometimes people in the used market destroy the value of good lenses like this by selling them way too low.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
1,871
Location
Tennessee
The f/4 version is a rock solid performer. So it really comes down to do you need f/2.8? Don’t get confused because your new 70-200mm f/2.8 can blur those backgrounds so nice at f/2.8 that you will get the same results with a 24-70mm when also shot at f/2.8. It is more then just aperture.

don’t get me wrong fast glass is great. The slowest lens I use in my normal kit it f/2.8. But I do a lot of shooting in dark locations and I need fast shutter speeds so I’ll take the extra light.

But unless you really need that extra stop in your 24-70, I would keep the f/4 version that is a good sharp lens, and instead pick up something like an 85mm or 50mm or 35mm f/1.8.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
4,846
Location
Columbia, Maryland
Real Name
Walter Rowe
I have the 24-70/4S and 70-200/2.8S. I am keeping the 24-70/4 because it makes an excellent travel lens. I have contemplated getting the 24-70/2.8S but have not pulled the trigger yet. If I do, it will likely mean selling ALL of my F-mount equipment and going all in on mirrorless. I still have the D850, 24-70/2.8E, 70-200/2.8E and use them from time to time. But the form factor and weight of the Z7 with 24-70/4S is really comfortable and convenient for travel. The Z platform is the future of Nikon without question.
 
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
2,528
Location
Winter Haven, florida
If you do buy the 2.8, keep the f4 version for when you are an old fart like me.
I love the look I can get with a 2.8. The only people that notice are other photographers. At least in my circle, no one else sees a difference.
Iso has gotten so much better, I rarely need 2.8 for its light gathering capabilities.
As I get older and am trying to lighten my kit- the f4's fit the bill.
At the same time I have kept and will never ever sell my 400mm 2.8. It is magical- even if I am the only one that notices.
We usually shoot to please ourselves- that part of the equation you will have to decide for yourself.
gary
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
4,103
Location
Potomac Falls, VA
Thank you very much to all of your for your inputs!

I agree with all and as I said on my first post, the f/4 produces excellent results and its a solid lens. To answer the question if I need the f/2.8, the reason I like this lens is the additional sharpness it provides plus the 2.8 aperture which can come handy when shooting indoors for lowering the ISO. In the comparison analysis I have seen the f/2.8 is also better in the corners even though the f/4 is already very good at corners. Coupled with a z7, I know that the f/2.8 will be the long-term best solution.

However, I think I will also keep the f/4 in my collection as it's a solid lens by itself. If I could sell it around 70-80% of its original new price it would be a good deal, but at or less than 50% is killing its fantastic value. Sometimes people in the used market destroy the value of good lenses like this by selling them way too low.
It looks like you have the 50 1.8 S in your collection. Have you considered other 1.8 lenses vs. a 2.8 zoom? I went with the 35, 50 and 85 to handle low light and better bokeh.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
24,705
Location
Orland Park, Illinois
It looks like you have the 50 1.8 S in your collection. Have you considered other 1.8 lenses vs. a 2.8 zoom? I went with the 35, 50 and 85 to handle low light and better bokeh.
I am considering going with the 35 and 50 primes rather than the 24-70 2.8. I would already have the 14-24 and the 70-200 2.8’s. Still thinking about it.

Glenn
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
767
Location
Puget Sound
Real Name
Ken
Did you buy the lens separately or in the kit? If you bought it in the kit, you did not necessarily pay the full retail price, so using that as a measure of how much you would be losing financially is not necessarily correct. But, unless your budget is quite tight, I would base the decision on use cases and not costs. Almost all of this gear goes down in price over time, so I try to ignore the sunk cost and focus on the use case or the value when sold.

Good luck,

--Ken
 
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
353
Location
Albuquerque, NM USA
Real Name
Don Roy
I got my 24-70mm/4 S as a kit. Going to /2.8 just because it exists and is a tad sharper is way down on my "what's next" list. Actually, it's not even on the list. To me, it's quite a few bucks for minimal improvement.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
44,364
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
Thank you very much to all of your for your inputs!

I agree with all and as I said on my first post, the f/4 produces excellent results and its a solid lens. To answer the question if I need the f/2.8, the reason I like this lens is the additional sharpness it provides plus the 2.8 aperture which can come handy when shooting indoors for lowering the ISO. In the comparison analysis I have seen the f/2.8 is also better in the corners even though the f/4 is already very good at corners. Coupled with a z7, I know that the f/2.8 will be the long-term best solution.

However, I think I will also keep the f/4 in my collection as it's a solid lens by itself. If I could sell it around 70-80% of its original new price it would be a good deal, but at or less than 50% is killing its fantastic value. Sometimes people in the used market destroy the value of good lenses like this by selling them way too low.
All kit lenses resell for less because owners just wanted the body when they bought the kit
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
44,364
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
I doubt the 2.8 is any sharper and if it is a little more sharpening in PP will make them equal
For me the trade off is weight vs low light and better BGs but at the cost of thinner DOF
And money
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
44,364
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
Did you buy the lens separately or in the kit? If you bought it in the kit, you did not necessarily pay the full retail price, so using that as a measure of how much you would be losing financially is not necessarily correct. But, unless your budget is quite tight, I would base the decision on use cases and not costs. Almost all of this gear goes down in price over time, so I try to ignore the sunk cost and focus on the use case or the value when sold.

Good luck,

--Ken
Great post reminding us all that lenses in kits cost less
 

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