Nikon or Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8? Looking for advice. Im thinking of replacing the 18-55mm kittens with the Nikon or Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8. Both lenses are FF, but I intend to use it on my...

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

Looking for advice.

Im thinking of replacing the 18-55mm kittens with the Nikon or Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8.

Both lenses are FF, but I intend to use it on my Nikon D5300 DX body.

According to my research:
1. The Nikon 24-70 has a sharpness issue at f2.8 but with an accurate autofocus. Tests made by lenstip.com showed only 1% of pictures out of focus.

2. The Tokina 24-70 is very sharp at f2.8 but suffers a higher amount of pictures out of focus, ~17%.

1st conclusion
From my current point of view this favors the Nikon over the Tokina as I probably won’t shoot that much at 2.8 due to the narrow Depth Of Field at that aperture.

2nd conclusion
Furthermore, test results show that the Nikon only has ~1% out of focus, which means less failed photos due to equipment performance.

3rd conclusion
Price is ~$850 for a used Nikon 24-70, but for a similar amount one get a brand new Tokina.

I’m leaning towards a used Nikon 24-70. Would you do the same using it on a DX body, or would you chose the Tokina?

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

Boris Ekner wrote:

Looking for advice. br br Im thinking of replaci... (show quote)

Just wait until the kittens grow to be a 24-70 cat. (Don't you just hate some spelling checkers?)

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Neither. Get the Tamron 24-70 G2. Fantastic lens and you'll save $800.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Plx9GHKhaYk&t=4s

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Yes the new Tamron G2 lenses are a step up from the old Tamrons and also a step up from the Nikons. I have both the 24-70 and the 70-200 G2 versions and they are great..

Bill_de Loc: US

Nikon currently has two 24-70 lenses.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/about-nikon/search.page?searchCollection=SEARCH_ALL&q=24-70

--

BebuLamar

Boris Ekner wrote:

Looking for advice. br br Im thinking of replaci... (show quote)

Up to you but I would buy the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 instead.

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

BHC wrote:

Just wait until the kittens grow to be a 24-70 cat. (Don't you just hate some spelling checkers?)

Hahahaha!

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

Bill_de wrote:

Nikon currently has two 24-70 lenses.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/about-nikon/search.page?searchCollection=SEARCH_ALL&q=24-70

--

I saw that too. However, as reviews states the old one, without the electronic aperture, is preferable I'm rather aiming for that one as one of my options.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

BebuLamar wrote:

Up to you but I would buy the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 instead.

Same here.
24mm isn’t all that wide on DX camera, 36mm FF equivalent
The 18 -55 was 27mm equivalent on the wide end.

It’s a killer pro lens Nikon made before they had full frame bodies.

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

BebuLamar wrote:

Up to you but I would buy the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 instead.

Thanks. I had the 17-55 as an option for a while, but the rather short focal length disturbed me as I want a slightly longer focal length on my everyday/all purpose lens.
And as I have learned that a full frame lens is the better option regarding picture quality on a DX body I decided to aim for one of those.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Boris Ekner wrote:

Thanks. I had the 17-55 as an option for a while, but the rather short focal length disturbed me as I want a slightly longer focal length on my everyday/all purpose lens.
And as I have learned that a full frame lens is the better option regarding picture quality on a DX body I decided to aim for one of those.

As I said, the 17-55 is a pro lens.
I had been using the fairly highly regarded 18-70 kit lens at the time. Tried the 17-55 was was blown away!
Don’t let the fact that it’s a DX lens turn you off.
It’s not like the others.
It is a bit short at the long end, but the best zoom lenses of the “trinity” don’t go beyond a 3x zoom.

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

travelwp wrote:

Yes the new Tamron G2 lenses are a step up from the old Tamrons and also a step up from the Nikons. I have both the 24-70 and the 70-200 G2 versions and they are great..

Just read the review of it at lenstip.com. This truly is a very interesting option. Thank you!

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

GoofyNewfie wrote:

As I said, the 17-55 is a pro lens.
I had been using the fairly highly regarded 18-70 kit lens at the time. Tried the 17-55 was was blown away!
Don’t let the fact that it’s a DX lens turn you off.
It’s not like the others.
It is a bit short at the long end, but the best zoom lenses of the “trinity” don’t go beyond a 3x zoom.

I obviously have to look at it again. :-) Thank you!

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Boris Ekner wrote:

I obviously have to look at it again. :-) Thank you!

An older lens, it does not have VR if you were looking for that feature.

Jim Bob

Boris Ekner wrote:

Looking for advice. br br Im thinking of replaci... (show quote)

Nope. I would first choose the new Tamron 24-70 g2, then the Tokina. Nikon would be last on the 24-70 list both because of price and performance.