Nikkor 28-70 f2.8 d - any comments?
Nov 13, 2016 12:08:10 #
MCoomber
Loc: Hamilton ontario
I have come across this lens for sale at around 800-1000. There is very little on YouTube as far as a review. Any comments, good or bad. I will be using this on a Nikon d600. Thanks in advance.
Nov 13, 2016 20:35:49 #
MCoomber wrote:
I have come across this lens for sale at around 800-1000. There is very little on YouTube as far as a review. Any comments, good or bad. I will be using this on a Nikon d600. Thanks in advance.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2870afs.htm
Great lens, fat and a little heavy. I would not pay more than 800 for used on eBay. Most will tell you to get the 24-70 (with VR) and I would agree, especially if you don't have 24mm covered already. That little extra (24mm vs. 28mm) can make a difference.
Nov 14, 2016 07:40:39 #
MCoomber wrote:
I have come across this lens for sale at around 800-1000. There is very little on YouTube as far as a review. Any comments, good or bad. I will be using this on a Nikon d600. Thanks in advance.
The 28-70mm f2.8 is the best normal zoom that Nikon has made optically. It outdoes both 24-70mm versions. Another great normal zoom is the 35mm-70mm f2.8. It can be bought for $500--600 in great shape and has a macro mode at 35mm. It goes to 1:4 by itself and add the Nikon 6T close up filter and it almost goes to 1:1 and rivals a macro lens in quality. It is tack sharp corner to corner and performs like a prime lens at all ranges.
Nov 14, 2016 08:43:28 #
bratliff
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Great lens. I use it on my d810 and have had it for years. Built like a tank. Prone to flaring a bit if shooting in to the sun and no image stabilization but a great walk around lens. It is large and heavy though. I also recommend the 17-35 f2.8 to give you the wide side. Same vintage as the 28-70 and built to the same quality. I bought both of these lenses used from online retailers with warranties and both had to be returned and repaired under warranty. For that reason, I would not buy from Ebay. Now that they've been repaired, they should last another decade or two of use.
Nov 14, 2016 09:33:52 #
Nov 14, 2016 09:58:21 #
I have used it extensively, very sharp and fast. One of my favorites!
Nov 14, 2016 10:23:20 #
bratliff wrote:
...I bought both of these lenses used from online retailers with warranties and both had to be returned and repaired under warranty. For that reason, I would not buy from Ebay. Now that they've been repaired, they should last another decade or two of use.
While I am not familiar with that lens, I have the 24-70mm f/2.8, I agree with bratliff - buy from a trusted vendor. You can find pre-owned or refurbished lenses and pay a reasonable price, but if something goes wrong with it, you are out of luck if the vendor won't take it back.
All my lenses are pre-owned or refurbished, and all lived up to my expectations based on the (trusted) vendor's rating of their condition.
Nov 14, 2016 10:49:24 #
I have used the 28-70 for quite a long time. Great lens. My wife has the 24-70 and continues to compline about the distortion it shows at 24mm. If I need something wider, I use the 17-35 and have the area covered. For a while I used the 20-35, and the 35-70. Also a great combination. All are professional lenses and have their place. My wife uses the 20-35 lens along side her 24-70. The trick is to find one in good shape. That's why you should buy through a dealer who offers a warranty.
For really wide angle, she uses a 11-17 Tamron on a D7200.
For really wide angle, she uses a 11-17 Tamron on a D7200.
Nov 14, 2016 10:54:32 #
MCoomber wrote:
I have come across this lens for sale at around 800-1000. There is very little on YouTube as far as a review. Any comments, good or bad. I will be using this on a Nikon d600. Thanks in advance.
I own the 24-70 2.8 non VR and it was my main lens for a couple of years. In shooting events/weddings, I wanted a little more range and was looking to possibly get the Nikon 24-120 but this lens received a lot of mixed reviews. Some people felt it was soft in critical areas while others loved it. Then I started looking at the Sigma 24-105 f4 art lens. The reviews were excellent across the board. I bought that lens and have not regretted it. It is an excellent lens that due to the f4 vs. the 2.8 I have to shoot at ISO 400 more than ISO 200, but with todays modern cameras even inexpensive ones will handle ISO 400 with no problems. The price for this lens is about the same you are quoting for the used Nikon.
Nov 14, 2016 11:44:42 #
MCoomber wrote:
I have come across this lens for sale at around 800-1000. There is very little on YouTube as far as a review. Any comments, good or bad. I will be using this on a Nikon d600. Thanks in advance.
It is a very good lens, but the price is way too high. I would not pay more than $600-$650. It is AF-D (non-motorized) and heavy. Focus is a bit slow and the D600 does not have the most robust motor drive. Optics are excellent. I had mine for about 3 years. Paid $750 in 2010 and sold in 2013 for $700. Now using the 24-70 AFS non-VR. The difference from 28mm to 24mm is noticeable. Unless you can get the 28-70 for an excellent price, look for a used 24-70
Nov 14, 2016 17:44:58 #
MCoomber
Loc: Hamilton ontario
Thank you all for the great information and other suggestions.
Michael
Michael
Nov 14, 2016 22:35:31 #
Leon S wrote:
I have used the 28-70 for quite a long time. Grea... (show quote)
I don't think Tamrom makes an 11-17mm. Could it be a Tokina 11-17mm ? Tamron makes an 11-18mm ,could it possibly be that one ?
Nov 14, 2016 22:43:54 #
I have the 28-70 AF-s "D"
It is fat and heavy and one of the nicest lenses I own.
There are quite a few of the "D" around.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00005LEOR/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all
---
It is fat and heavy and one of the nicest lenses I own.
There are quite a few of the "D" around.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00005LEOR/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all
---
Nov 14, 2016 23:31:57 #
boomer826 wrote:
I don't think Tamrom makes an 11-17mm. Could it be a Tokina 11-17mm ? Tamron makes an 11-18mm ,could it possibly be that one ?
Your right. It is a tamron 11-18. I should have checked the lens before typing. It does an acceptable job for what we paid for it. Got it on a package deal with a D50. Sold the D50 for what I paid for the package. The lens turned out then to become a free bee. Actually sold a few pictures using that lens, so it can't be too bad, but there are better around. Thanks for the correction Boomer
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.