about | support
home
 

Search Used

Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED NIKKOR AF-S

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
63 171173 Jul 11, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
94% of reviewers $6,069.38
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.66
8.06
9.4
224-70

Specifications:
Constant maximum aperture of f/2.8 at all focal lengths
Enhanced optical formulas, engineered to produce exceptional sharpness, contrast and color, render outstanding image integrity
ED (Extra-low dispersion) glass elements minimize chromatic aberration to deliver stunning sharpness and contrast
Aspherical lenses including large-diameter PGM element eliminate various types of lens aberration even at the widest aperture
Nano Crystal Coat virtually eliminates internal lens element reflections, effectively reducing ghosting and flare
High-performance Nikon Super Integrated Coating offers superior color reproduction, while minimizing ghosting and flare
IF (Internal Focusing) enables focusing without changing the length of lens barrel
Nikonís exclusive Silent Wave Motor for fast, quiet autofocus operation
Rounded diaphragm opening (9 blades) makes out-of-focus elements appear more natural
M/A mode enables instant switching from autofocus to manual focus, even during AF servo operation, with virtually no time lag
Dedicated flower-shaped lens hood effectively minimizes stray light
Lens barrel is built for comfortable holding while featuring a rugged design; zoom and focusing rings provide smooth operation
______________________________

Focal length: 24-70 mm
Maximum aperture: f/2.8
Minimum aperture: f/22
Lens construction: 15 elements in 11 groups (with 3 ED glass elements, 3 aspherical lenses and one Nano Crystal Coat)
Picture angle: 84į - 34į20í (61į - 22į50í with DX-format camera)
Closest focus distance: 0.38 m/1.2 ft. (with focal length 35-50 mm
Maximum reproduction ratio: 1/3.7
No. of diaphragm blades: 9 (rounded)
Filter/attachment size: 77 mm
Focusing: Internal Focusing (IF) system; autofocus with a built-in SWM and manual focus
Diameter x length
(extension from lens mount): Approx. 83 x 133 mm/3.3 x 5.2 in.
Weight: Approx. 900 g/31.7 oz.
Supplied accessories: Bayonet Hood HB-40, Semi-soft Case CL-M3


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 
       †††
jmphotography
Offline



Registered: Feb 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 132
Review Date: May 27, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,500.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build quality, incredible Sharpness, Bokeh!!!! Wide open sharpness
Cons:
None for me

I recently switched from the big C 24-70 2.8L to the a D3 with the 24-70 and I must say that I am so happy I made the switch. This lens has impressed me with its precision focus and speed on the D3. This is my workhorse lens for my weddings. I feel I can really notice a beautiful, more natural bokeh on this lens over my past lens, possibly dues to the fact the Nikon uses more aperture blades to create more of a circle. I was a Hasselblad shooter for about 14 years and missed their lenses. These new Nikon lenses cure my appetite for hasselblad quality. The Nikon lenses are built very well and solid.

May 27, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jmphotography to your Buddy List  
Grognard
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2153
Review Date: May 4, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Better balanced than the "Beast", just as sharp, seems to focus slightly faster with less hunting on my D2X.
Cons:
Price

This is a wonderful lens, albeit one that I purchased for the extra 4mm over my 28-70mm. Both, to my poor eyes, seem equally sharp, but the 24-70mm handles flare better, and seems to focus a little better, with less hunting in low light better on my D2X. I just about had second thoughts at the price though. I paid more for this lens than my 70-200mm.

May 4, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Grognard to your Buddy List  
SoundHound
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

Registered: Jan 14, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 5325
Review Date: May 3, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,700.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp wide open. Smooth and quiet
Cons:
It's so good you wish for more reach on the tele end. so you don't have to change up. Pricey when compared to the competition

Not much else to say except that I sold my, extremely well calibrated, Canon 24-70 (from a 14 lens Canon inventory)
because if 'm going to shoot a 24-70 it's going to be this Nikkor.


May 3, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add SoundHound to your Buddy List  
K.P.K.
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 19, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 136
Review Date: Apr 21, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: A very good pro lens
Cons:
None.

This lens is way better than the last poster suggests. Either he had a bad example or has some personal issues with Nikon. My score is 10.
This glass will be an addition to the "Nikon Hall Of Fame."


Apr 21, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add K.P.K. to your Buddy List  
K.P.K.
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 19, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 136
Review Date: Apr 21, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp & very true to your talent/skills.
Cons:
None.

I've given this lens top marks all round. I think it really deserves it. I've owned the 17-55/2.8 Nikkor & the 24-70 is a better lens period. This glass is sharp & will be in the "Nikkor Hall Of Fame".

Apr 21, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add K.P.K. to your Buddy List  
Hendrik
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 21, 2002
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3906
Review Date: Apr 7, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,400.00 | Rating: 5 

Pros: Build quality is great. It balances well on the D200 with battery-grip.
Cons:
Severe chromatic aberration and very soft corners at the wide angle.

The new super cool 24-70 with Nano-coating is a difficult lens to review. The reviews are very great. If you belief all reviews, itís 'The ONE lens', made by dwarves using mystical ingredients in the blue fire of mount heaven.

My expectations were high. When I finally got my sample after a long time wait, I was shocked. The first images were very bad. I made some new images the next day and my results were the same at the wide end. I also got very good results at close range without border detail.

My observations:
# Chromatic aberration at the wide-end at f2.8 and f5.6
# Very soft edges at f2.8 and f5.6
# Soft edges between 35-70? Could not confirm it, but suspect it.

The soft edges are partly or completely caused by field curvature. This is by design. Unfortunately this lens has such an extreme field curvature, that itís not usable for landscape photographers, because they need edge sharpness. Iím not talking about wide open, but even all up to f8.

I returned the lens and at the moment Iím on the waiting list of a new sample. I hope itís only bad quality control at the Nikon factory.

Iím not the only one, do a Google search and you will see more complaints. Some suggested most of the problems are on the D200

See full resolutions images at Photozone: http://photozone.fotki.com/nikkor_2470_28/fieldcurvature.html and a f8 version of a castle (look at the borders): http://photozone.fotki.com/nikkor_2470_28/dsc423801.html

My own images:
All shot with a D200 and converted with LR to PS. Capture Sharpening with Photokit Sharpener at High-res and Narrow Edge. Save as JPG at quality 10. (They are still large).
24 = 24mm
28 = f2.8
56 = f5.6

_http://www.xs4all.nl/~honey/fotografie/downloads/lenstest_24_28_1.jpg
_http://www.xs4all.nl/~honey/fotografie/downloads/lenstest_24_56_1.jpg

_http://www.xs4all.nl/~honey/fotografie/downloads/lenstest_24_28_2.jpg
_http://www.xs4all.nl/~honey/fotografie/downloads/lenstest_24_56_2.jpg

This is another picture (100% crops).

I expected the same quality at 24mm @ 5.6 as the 35mm can achieve @ 2.8

_http://www.xs4all.nl/~honey/fotografie/downloads/crops.jpg

Iím emphasizing the 24mm focal length, because the problems are easily visible, but my experience is that at 2.8 the whole range suffers from field curvature or softness at the sides. At 5.6 the 35-70mm range is good.
This is an example at 50mm and f2.8. I didnít showed it initially because I donít know if itís a good test method or not, but judge for yourself.
_http://www.xs4all.nl/~honey/fotografie/downloads/focustest_50_28.jpg

More images at dpreview (D300 review).

Should you buy this lens? I think you should. Most people are happy, but beware of problems and especially if you shoot landscapes at the wide end.


Apr 7, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Visit Homepage Add Hendrik to your Buddy List  
waterflyboy22
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 756
Review Date: Mar 29, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,575.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Awesome construction and clarity. Great Bokeh. THE lens to have in this range, whether prime or zoom.
Cons:
Slightly long. And not even that is an issue with this lens.

My analogy is simple for those that know aviation. (If not, you can still get my point).
This is like transitioning from a mid 1980's Gulfstream III to a fresh off the production like Gulfstream G450. While its predecessor (the 28-70 f/2.8 in my case) was a great piece of equipment and can still get the job done very well, the capabilities and performance of the new model are simply eye watering in comparison.
In conclusion, I quote the incomprable Ferris Buehler: "It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up".


Mar 29, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add waterflyboy22 to your Buddy List  
lextalionis
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 28, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1076
Review Date: Mar 2, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,750.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Nice sharp fast lens and well balanced on the camera. A pleasure to use for model photography.
Cons:
Having some Canon experience as well, I wish the price point was comparable to Canon's 24-70, but I guess you can't compare apples to oranges.

This is a work-horse of a lens. Very fast AF and very sharp. Colors and contrast are perfect. I highly recommend this lens.

Here are some sample photos taken with a D3.

Sample Photos

-Roy


Mar 2, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add lextalionis to your Buddy List  
Julius
Online
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 26, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 955
Review Date: Feb 29, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Well-built, excellent workmanship, sharp at all focal lengths.
Cons:
None.

This is one fabulous lens, top-notch craftsmanship, crisp and great colors and sharp throughout the whole focal length range, even wide open.
Perfect match for the D3 as an all around lens, balances very well on this camera. Nikon definitely scored a home run on this one.


Feb 29, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Julius to your Buddy List  
EWPurdy
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 27, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 143
Review Date: Feb 18, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Resolution, build quality, focus speed.
Cons:
Lens consistently misfocuses at wide end.

Wow. After switching from Canon, this lens is amazing compared to its counterpart. The sharpness is stunning. My only complaint is the AF at the wide end which consistently misfocuses. I found the technique of zooming to 70mm focusing and zooming back out to 24mm helps significantly in this regard.

Feb 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add EWPurdy to your Buddy List  
DavidWEGS
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3799
Review Date: Jan 20, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: scarry sharp when correctly focused, ligher than the 28-70 and quiet. The feel is great to zoom, less mechanical feeling than comparable zooms.
Cons:
occasional missed focus at 24mm, but on the d300 you can fine tune that a little. extending element (ok, I'm digging here)

beauty of a lens. Soooo much better than the Canon counterpart that you just laugh out loud if you have ever used that lens, then try this.

I got this after deciding to keep the 14-24 and thinking about having a tad more reach than the 17-55. I am vey pleased with that decision.

I did find that it would front focus a tad on one of the 300 bodies, but with a little fine tuning, its all good.

The look of the images (which is really why we're all here right) is so nice. Having a clarity that is reminiscent of MF days.

If you are deciding on this lens based on any quality of image, it is the best, along with the 14-24.


Jan 20, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add DavidWEGS to your Buddy List  
smhphoto.com
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 18, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 77
Review Date: Jan 19, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.95 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Extremely sharp, starting right at f/2.8; great feel to the lens, Beats previous standard zooms in image quality (28-70 f/2.8, 17-55 f/2.8, etc.), sharper than all primes in it's range, very fast focus and near silent focus (better than almost any other AFS Nikkor I've tried to date). In summary: One wickedly sharp, contrasty lens with excellent bokeh--a must have!
Cons:
A little longer than expected, somewhat heavy.

This lens is simply awesome--oh yeah, and it's a zoom lens (you almost forget when viewing the images--however its size & heft gently remind you its a zoom!). This lens is sharper wide open than the 17-55 f/2.8 and the 28-70 f/2.8, and is unbelievable when stopped down. This lens, mated to the D3 is *the* combination for shooting weddings.

This lens focuses extremely fast and is unbelievably silent when focusing--quieter than every other AFS lens I've tried so far, and I've owned and tried quiet a few of them).

The optical performance is simply off the charts. At 24 mm and f/4 on a D200, the lens hits 2320 lines/mm resolution! Simply astonishing!

I've had no problems so far with AF at widest zoom setting--no problem whatsoever. I suppose one needs to make sure the AF target at widest zoom setting isn't 'confusing' for the AF system (as in too many small, contrasty targets for the AF to lock onto--thus the camera may choose a different target than you want; maybe this is a stretch? I haven't had any problems at all).

Overall, a must have lens and a perfect mate for the D3. Highly recommended.


Jan 19, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add smhphoto.com to your Buddy List  
traveler
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 8, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3453
Review Date: Jan 18, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Rolls Royce build. Superb balance. Amazing Color rendition. Excellent sharpness wide open across the board. Bokeh is about as good as it gets.
Cons:
None

All I can say is this lens delivers in spades. It is sharp wide open from one end to the other, and with the usual sharpening in PP delivers a 3D image. There is literally NO way to describe the resultant image from this lens. You simply must use one and view the image 100% on a good calibrated screen to appreciate it. I find it sharp across the board even wide open. By f4 you can do surgery with it. The build screams "Pro" and the balance with it's new longer slimmer design is a great balance on a gripped D300 body to be sure. If you are in the market for a zoom like this and have the $$ RUN don't walk to get one. You simply can NOT be disappointed. There is perhaps a small amount of typical wide angle distortion at the 24mm end but not much and what there is is so easily fixed in PP.

Jan 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add traveler to your Buddy List  
Marco
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 21, 2002
Location: Italy
Posts: 1415
Review Date: Jan 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp corner to corner, especially from 35mm to 70mm. It renders images with very pleasing bokeh and 3D look. Very nice to handle despite the weight and dimensions.
Cons:
Sometimes for perfect sharpness at 24-28mm it's better to focus at 70mm and zoom back. Some distortion.

I love this lens.
Images are crisp with a sense of presence I've rarely seen in a zoom.
It easily surpasses my 35-70/2.8 at any aperture and my 17-35/2.8 at wider apertures. The 17-35 at 24mm though is slightly better when stopped down past f/8.
Flare is well controlled, although not totally absent.
It handles nicely and it actually seems smaller/lighter than it really is.

I noticed that at 24-28mm sometimes the focus isn't precise (on my previous D200 and now on the D3, although to a lesser extent), so it's better, on my sample at least, to focus at 70mm and zoom back.
Another drawback is some distortion. While easily correctable in postprocessing, it shouldn't be here in a lens of this caliber.
If it wasn't for the focus issue and distortion, I'd rate it 10+.
I gave a 9 because there's always room for improvements.


Jan 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Marco to your Buddy List  
hbillsmith
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 24, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 357
Review Date: Dec 20, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Compared to 28-70: Sharper, Lighter and eerily quiet AF
Cons:
Cost

Please excuse the misc commentary but I find these types of reviews helpful if I can understand where the reviewer is coming from.

Moved from a D200, 17-55, 28-70, 18-200 to the D300, 24-70, 18-200. I really liked the 17-55 but found the tele reach just a little too short. I like the 28-70 but it was so heavy and the wide end was almost but not quite wide enough. When I upgraded to the D300 I re-bought the 18-200 for a light travel lens and I'm filling the pro end with a 70-200 2.8 VR (I had the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS and I miss it). I took a chance that the 24-70 2.8 would hit my sweet spot. What a great decision that was. I don't miss the 17-55 at all.

The 24-70 is an incredible lens. From a sharpness perspective, it's sharper than the 17-55 and wide open it's even sharper than my previous little champ the 50mm 1.8. Autofocus is incredible. It's so quiet that at first I thought it wasn't working but a check in the viewfinder confirmed it works absolutely perfect.

The lens is still a little heavy like the 28-70 but the barrel diameter is smaller so it just feels better in my hand. The front element still protrudes somewhat on tele (unlike those where all the lens movement remains hidden) but it's not bad. On my D300 I get a full frame equivalent 36-105 (as opposed to the old 28-70's 42-105) and for me it's perfect.

The fact that this is not a DX lens makes it a bonus if you believe like I do that eventually, everything will move to full frame. Lastly, if I do decide that I want more wide, I'll get the 12-24, but I honestly doubt it will come to that. If you think the D300 and D3 were incredible camera's you are in for an equally big surprise when you see what a great lens the 24-70 2.8 is.


Dec 20, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add hbillsmith to your Buddy List  

†††



Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED NIKKOR AF-S

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
63 171173 Jul 11, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
94% of reviewers $6,069.38
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.66
8.06
9.4
224-70


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4