DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Is anybody seriously contemplating this addition?

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Not me.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

No, no one is.

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

Certainly not me. Unless you are giving one away to a good home...

But I'm curious why you would ask?
Need a boot in the pants to knock you off a proverbial fence?
(Either way...)

Ernie Misner Loc: Lakewood, WA

For a few years now I have been waiting for this updated lens. Now that it has happened though I am turned off by the size, weight, and 82mm filter. I wish they would make an f4 version.

19104 Loc: Philadelphia

One of my co-workers already has the piggy bank out. He says he needs the VR because he is shaky.

mongoose777 Loc: Frisco Texas

I'll eventually get one as it appears to be much better in overall all quality build. The original tends to be somewhat sensitive to normal pro abuse, causing it to get a little out of whack if bumped to hard.
Im looking forward to it.
Currently I have two in the shop via Nikon Service Center for not being as sharp to slightly blurred to the right side of the images.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

A few years back when I got the Nikon D70 with (modest) kit lens, I opted for the Sigma 24 70mm f/2,8 lens in preference to a 'better' Nikon lens. The front of the Nikon lens rotated on zooming/focussing, and that was a hindrance when using a polar filter. I still use the Sigma lens on DX and FF digital bodies. It doesn't have VR, but I can live without that at those focal lengths.

trc Loc: Logan, OH

I have had the Nikon f/2.8 24-70 mm lens for years without the VR. You know what? It has been great and not having VR never bothered me one time. It is easy to use and a very good 'go to' lens for a multitude of shots. I love that lens.

I admit, I do like my 70-200 mm f/2.8 lens with VR for portrait shots, and actually quite a few other genres as well. But even that one I find that I don't use the VR all that much . . . it is usually off, and always off while on a tripod, of course.

Best Regards,
Tom

tjphxaz Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Yes, pre-ordered from B&H with expected ship date August 27 or so. VR plus other new features enticed me. I expect this lens will get a lot of use for indoor and low light family activities and events where hand holding is the best option.
When I was younger, I didn't succumb to early adoption but now the luxury of time is slipping away so I will hope Nikon got it right with this new lens and, if not, the problems will show up in the first year and be fixed under warranty anyway. If not, I'll have an expensive paper weight.

Robeng Loc: California

I just pre order one. Got a $1000.00 trade in for my old one.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

The boot in the pants theory was certainly a good possibility, but particularly after buying the 80-400 VR this past week, I don't need a whole lot of help getting stupid.

To better answer your question, I'm recuperating from last week's neck surgery and headed back to Yellowstone Sept 23 for probably our last hiking venture there. Body says to back off! I need to be properly armed for the trip, plus the frequent family gatherings would make good use of a 24-70. I shake enough that I would forego the more sensible non-VR model at a much better price. All or nothing! Always a way of justifying....

I'm debating whether to use my primes more for the lower light or spring for the 24-70. A lot of money to spend for convenience sake. But again, that's what we sometimes do. I have the 35,50, and 85 1.8's. The F4 Tokina 12-24 is not bad, used it there before. I can't think of another prime that would make me happier. Could gain a stop on my lower end...probably not necessary.

My wife thinks that when I had the two pair of vertebrae fused, I should have had my head removed from my posterior end. Probably what caused the damage in the first place. :roll: :roll:

I think that you helped me to question and better analyze my thoughts! :thumbup:

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

Nope. I am very pleased with the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S that I have now.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I had one but sold it. It was so big and expensive that I was nervous using it. Stupid, I know. Instead, I recently got the previous version, the 35-70mm f/2.8 for just a few hundred dollars. This past week, I was shooting with a guy who travels with a D4 and a D4s. He was telling us how much he likes his new Nikon 600mm lens ($12,300) as compared with his old 600mm ($10,300). So, all things are relative. I try to get maximum bang for my buck.

mikeysaling Loc: essex uk

Happy with my 24-70 - no need to change !