My gear includes a D600, 50mm 1.2 AIS, 85mm 1.8g, a 80-200 2.8D and a 35-70 2.8. I'm thinking about selling the 35-70 2.8, which I think is too soft (maybe just my copy) and the 80-200 and buying the 24-70 2.8. The 70-200 f/4 has also caught my eye. I shoot a lot of events and family shots (portraits, track meets, basketball games, etc.). Two different ranges, I know, but which would you get if you you only had the fund for one of these? I'm thinking that the 70-200 might be a little long, which is the issue that I have with the 80-200 (in addition to the non-VR). Thoughts?
I have both, and they're great. I use them mostly for events, the 24-70 indoors, or for outdoor group shots, and the 70-200/4 outdoors. So depending where you shoot most, you can start with one or the other, but should eventually plan to get both.
There's no way around it, you need both. They are 2 very different lenses for very different purposes. I personally use the 24-70 range a lot more than the 70-200 range, so my choice is obvious if I had to pick. But only you can decide which one is for you.
Thanks guys. I'm getting from the two of you that the 24-70 is more versatile, so I'll probably get that one first. I was trying to avoid dropping the 1900 right now but I guess I've got to do what I've got to do
fyffem wrote:
Thanks guys. I'm getting from the two of you that the 24-70 is more versatile, so I'll probably get that one first. I was trying to avoid dropping the 1900 right now but I guess I've got to do what I've got to do
Why not get the Tamron 24-70 VC? It's cheaper and a better performer.
I use my 24-70 way more than my 70-200, but that's just me. My advice is to look though your images and see what focal lengths you tend to use the most and then go for a lens in the range. You really do need both though.
While some of my favorite images come from the 70-200, I use the 24-70 range much much more. The Nikon 24-70 is still the king of optical performance in this focal range.
May 10, 2013 at 12:47 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Steve Perry wrote:
I use my 24-70 way more than my 70-200, but that's just me. My advice is to look though your images and see what focal lengths you tend to use the most and then go for a lens in the range. You really do need both though.
Looking at your lineup, I think you will see more improvement by going with the 24-70. The 24-70 also gives you the wideangle coverage that you don't have. As for the 80-200, it's still a very good lens, especially for portraits. Also keep in mind that while the 70-200 f/4 is sharper, it does not isolate as well as the 2.8 telephotos.
mfletch wrote:
While some of my favorite images come from the 70-200, I use the 24-70 range much much more. The Nikon 24-70 is still the king of optical performance in this focal range.
The surprise I had when getting my first FullFrame camera was
that I really liked shooting wider.
I started buying lens like the 14-24 and 17-35
instead of telephotos like I expected.
The longest lens I now use on the D600 is the 28-300
and many of the images captured are closer to 28mm.
I was going to throw my two cents into the ring, but it looks like you've already made your decision. Personally, I couldn't afford the Nikon 24-70 at the moment. So I ended up purchasing the Sigma 24-70 for about $500 here in the forums. When looking at equipment... I think I'd trust the folks here more so than those selling on eBay.
hasn't seen much use since I picked up the Sigma 35, but for any paid work the 24-70 is always with me.