Which Nikon Lens and does f/2.8 make a difference: I am considering Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 ED VR or Nikon 24-85 f/2.8-4.0 D or Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. The 24-70 is by far the most expensive...

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

I am considering Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 ED VR or Nikon 24-85 f/2.8-4.0 D or Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. The 24-70 is by far the most expensive and it does have 2.8 through the range, but is their much difference between f/2.8 and 3.5 and 4.0?

breck Loc: Derbyshire UK

It is not just the constant wide appature, the lens is brilliant, the casing meta, the front element does not turn so works with pola and grad filters, it is dust and weather sealed built to withstand pro treatment.
Spend your money on good glass it is a far better investment than the camera which will soon be outdated

Haydon

Besides the constant aperture and build quality the F2.8 lets in twice as much light as the F4.0. This matters to challenging light conditions that you might encounter. The 24-70 F2.8 is a staple for wedding photographers.

Db7423 Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Between the three the 24-70 is the clear choice- it Is one of the lenses in Nikons "Holy Trinity" (the others are the 70-200 and the 14-24-all three Pro lenses). The others are not even in the same ballpark. As said above, buy the best lens you can as they are forever. ;)

amehta Loc: Boston

Mark7829 wrote:

I am considering Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 ED VR or Nikon 24-85 f/2.8-4.0 D or Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. The 24-70 is by far the most expensive and it does have 2.8 through the range, but is their much difference between f/2.8 and 3.5 and 4.0?

We can all agree that the 24-70mm f/2.8 has better IQ. Whether that difference matters to you is tough for others to answer for you. But based on your attention to detail in post processing, it seem that IQ matters. Of course, you go up another notch with a f/1.4 prime (Nikon, Zeiss, or Sigma), but you lose the versatility of the zoom. It's all trade-offs. :-)

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Mark, if you can justify the cost, 24-70 is the way to go.

Avoid the 24-85 f/2.8-4.0 D - the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 ED VR will give you better results.

Russ1700

I own the 24-70, best ever lens. If you can afford it, its a no brainer.

RodKlukas

The 2.8 fixed aperture also allows the camera to focus more accurately in lower light, than variable aperture lenses.
This is because the contrast is lower as you stop down or lose light due to conditions on site.

That is why with slower long lenses or using teleconverters, causes problems with accurate focus as well. 5.6 light levels or F8 or more stopped down, really becomes untenable for autofocus.
Hope this helps,
Rod

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Mark7829 wrote:

I am considering Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 ED VR or Nikon 24-85 f/2.8-4.0 D or Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. The 24-70 is by far the most expensive and it does have 2.8 through the range, but is their much difference between f/2.8 and 3.5 and 4.0?

Another advantage of a faster lens which is not often mentioned is your flash range is extended.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

A faster lens allows more light into the camera, which in turn allows the system to acquire focus faster...As for the previous comment about flash range being extended, while true, is not much of an advantage since the DOF is so small wide open & the extended distance is only at the maximum aperture... Better way to extend flash distance is to up your ISO (provided your camera handles higher ISO's well)

wsherman Loc: New York

The 24-70 is more expensive for a reason or as outlined above for many reasons. I own one and so should you. Huge difference over the other glass. Don't skimp on your lenses.

twillsol Loc: St. Louis, MO

I have the "holy trinity" all great lenses! Get the 24 - 70 2.8.

Db7423 wrote:

Between the three the 24-70 is the clear choice- it Is one of the lenses in Nikons "Holy Trinity" (the others are the 70-200 and the 14-24-all three Pro lenses). The others are not even in the same ballpark. As said above, buy the best lens you can as they are forever. ;)

fotogk Loc: Tuftonboro, NH

take a look at nikon 28 - 70 f2.8 less expensive then the 24-70, great glass, well built about half the cost

Acountry330 Loc: Dothan,Ala USA

Get the 24-70 2.8 you will not be disappointed. The price is a little steep but well worth it. It sits proudly on my D-800 most of the time.

saxkiwi Loc: New Zealand

Mark7829 wrote:

I am considering Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 ED VR or Nikon 24-85 f/2.8-4.0 D or Nikon 24-70 f/2.8. The 24-70 is by far the most expensive and it does have 2.8 through the range, but is their much difference between f/2.8 and 3.5 and 4.0?

There is no comparison really the 24-70 2.8 is not only a joy to use but when in low light situations you will need the 2.8. constant aperture is always better which gives constant shutter speed. If you're not too worried about 1 stop difference and can live with it then get the VR model which will compensate. If you can afford it get the 2.8 its what all the pros use