Nikon 70-200 2.8 lens upgrade. Is it worthwhile? I am looking to add a new Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 to the kit. Currently this range is covered by my nikon 28-300mm. Would the addition be...

Alpix Loc: Cambridgeshire, UK

I am looking to add a new Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 to the kit. Currently this range is covered by my nikon 28-300mm. Would the addition be worthwhile? I hear it's an excellent lense, but wondered if those with both in their kit may have advice. May also go for a 28-70mm f2.8 as a pair of lenses to cover the general range.
Thanks for any advice.

soli Loc: London, UK.

They are expensive but superb lenses. the 70-200 will become your "go to " lens.

Leon S Loc: Minnesota

If you're like many of us, you will always want another lens. I shoot the Nikon 28-70 2.8 and the 80-200 2.8. However I also have the 24-85 vr when I don't want to carry the weight or when enough light is not a concern. If finances were not a concern, I would also get the 28-300 but am happy with the 70-300 vr. My advice would be to chose wisely and only get the lenses you really need. Otherwise you will find yourself with more equipment than you can use. Keep in mind that only one lens fits on a lens at a time.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Alpix wrote:

I am looking to add a new Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 to the kit. Currently this range is covered by my nikon 28-300mm. Would the addition be worthwhile? I hear it's an excellent lense, but wondered if those with both in their kit may have advice. May also go for a 28-70mm f2.8 as a pair of lenses to cover the general range.
Thanks for any advice.

Will the 70-200mm lens do anything your 28-300mm lens can't do? The same goes for the 28-70mm lens.
I don't think adding either or both of those lenses to the 28-300mm lens makes sense unless you need the wider aperture. If so, replacing the 28-300mm with the other two would be the way to go.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Alpix wrote:

I am looking to add a new Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 to the kit. Currently this range is covered by my nikon 28-300mm. Would the addition be worthwhile? I hear it's an excellent lense, but wondered if those with both in their kit may have advice. May also go for a 28-70mm f2.8 as a pair of lenses to cover the general range.
Thanks for any advice.

Isn't the 28-300 an f/3.5-5.6 lens and the 70-200 f/2.8 is 2.8 across the entire range?

That being so, the 2.8 would be my choice for the added light, especially at the long end.

And then there is the comparison by Dxomark

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-70-200mm-F28-G-ED-VR-II-on-Nikon-D7100-versus-AF-S-NIKKOR-28-300mm-f-3.5-5.6-ED-VR-on-Nikon-D7100__406_865_323_865

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

Are you finding that the lens you have is not fast enough to get the pictures you want? Do you need a lens that you can limit the depth of field to blur the background? In other words why do you want the faster lens? You may just want to get the so called best lenses. That is OK too if you can afford it. - Dave

JeffDavidson Loc: Originally Detroit Now Los Angeles

Although not quite the same zoom range, the 70-200 F2.8 is very sharp and has VR. I love it, it is an excellent and favorite lens.

Dan De Lion Loc: Montana

Alpix wrote:

I am looking to add a new Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 to the kit. Currently this range is covered by my nikon 28-300mm. Would the addition be worthwhile? I hear it's an excellent lense, but wondered if those with both in their kit may have advice. May also go for a 28-70mm f2.8 as a pair of lenses to cover the general range.
Thanks for any advice.

-----

If you want to carry an anchor around, get the fine f2.8. If you want a lighter and better lens (see DXOmark) get the Nikkor f4 70-200.

------

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

I say go for it, its a great lens. if u can afford it get it. Help keep the camera companies in business.

Dan De Lion Loc: Montana

Alpix wrote:

I am looking to add a new Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 to the kit. Currently this range is covered by my nikon 28-300mm. Would the addition be worthwhile? I hear it's an excellent lense, but wondered if those with both in their kit may have advice. May also go for a 28-70mm f2.8 as a pair of lenses to cover the general range.
Thanks for any advice.

-----

If you want to carry an anchor around, get the f2.8. If you want a lighter and sharper lens (see DXOmark), get the Nikkor f4 70-200.

-----

bentrider Loc: Mississippi

I've had my Nikon f2.8 80-200 for several years. It is my "go-to" lens for many shots. I wouldn't trade for it. It is a bread-and-butter lens for many professionals. It took me a while to get one, whenever a company got a shipment in, they sold like hotcakes. I highly recommend it.

Alpix Loc: Cambridgeshire, UK

Thanks for the replies.
I am looking to improve image quality as much as possible.
I make regular sales currently, but still work full time (as a design engineer), so are looking to increase my quality, stock and sales of images.
In the months and years ahead, we plan on building things up much further, so would be looking for a return on my investments longer term.
Thanks for the interesting comparison link Gallagher.
As you say Leon, there is a danger of having too much. I am in a position where I can gather my ideal kit (though I guess it will be always changing to some extent), and sell on what I don't use. Though it may be useful to keep the 28-300 for some applications? I am not in a position to wast money though, but who is?
We also travel to Asia regularly, so I am looking for kit that is somewhat portable, though quality is the main drive.

Dan De Lion Loc: Montana

Alpix wrote:

Thanks for the replies. br I am looking to improve... (show quote)

-----

All good reasons to check out the Nikkor 70-200 f4.

-----

Jim Bob

Alpix wrote:

I am looking to add a new Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 to the kit. Currently this range is covered by my nikon 28-300mm. Would the addition be worthwhile? I hear it's an excellent lense, but wondered if those with both in their kit may have advice. May also go for a 28-70mm f2.8 as a pair of lenses to cover the general range.
Thanks for any advice.

If you mean the new FL, it is extraordinary but as you know, it comes at an extraordinary cost. Only you can decide if it's worthwhile to you. Why rely on a bunch of strangers? Read some reviews.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

I know someone who owns the FX 28-300mm lens and uses it on a D7100. It is a great lens, but it does not rate with the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8. This lens is awesome, and quite expensive. You can save money by purchasing a Sigma or Tamron lens, but I'm sure the quality isn't equal to the Nikon Brand. Or Canon.