quenepas Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

Good day, All. A quick question on the purchase of a Nikon lens.

Recently, I purchased a Nikon D850 camera and sold my D610. I have an old Nikon 35-70mm F/2.8D lens I purchased “Used” on eBay some time ago and use it for just about everything. I want to get the most out of the Nikon D850 and am giving some thought to getting better glass.

I’m shooting mostly daytime landscapes and un-posed indoors shots of family members. I’m an occasional tripod user but not overly religious about it; try to keep my shutter speeds at/above 1/125 (and ISO as required).

The Nikon 35-70mm F/2.8D lens is in good shape, works ok but not great autofocusing. I’m considering selling this old lens and purchasing the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED lens. Also, I’m giving some thought to the current version of the that lens, the Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR.

I realize that both newer lenses are significantly pricier than my old 35-70mm F/2.8D. For sure the 24-70mm f/2.8G ED should be better than my 35-70mm F/2.8D. And their lies my question: Is the photo image quality of the 2 newer lenses that much better to merit the upgrade?

Thanks in advance for your comments. Val

Bullfrog Bill Loc: CT

The VR version is longer, heavier and uses larger size filter. Do you really need VR in the 24-70 range?

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Have you read Thom Hogan's reviews on the 24-70mm lenses? He's very good.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

The VR version would probably be best for your purpose. I doubt you’d see any difference in IQ. Both have too much distortion wider than 28mm (my personal opinion).

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I use the non-VR 24-70 as the default lens on my D850. It has served that same function on the D810. It works great, and with good technique, no VR is not a problem. As pointed out above, it is significantly smaller and lighter than the VR version. I've looked at, but not really used the other lens, and am certain it would be a good choice also.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

As a D850 user, I suggest you look at the Tamron 24-70 G2, which is an excellent performer with the D850 body. Also, the Nikon 16-35 f/4 is a great Prosumer medium wide angle zoom and is priced competitively for a walk around lens.

To join the bigs, look at the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 or the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

I have the 35-70mm f2.8 AF-D, this lens was considered as pro lens in that old time. Solid built and sharp, it doesn't have built in motor, that will be less concern about motor breaking down. Focus speed doesn't a factor at all with this lens, slower than the G lens of course, but this lens is not for action any way. I used it on my daughter's wedding last year, it was great! For me it's enough for me and won't spend big for the new one!

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I have both versions of the 24-70 f/2.8 lens. I started with the old (non-VR) version probably around 2008 and it was one of my primary lenses. Around 2014 I got a 200-500 with the new generation of VR and really liked it. As I am aging, I find the VR increasingly useful. I had the 70-200 VR (from 2008) and the VR was useful, but I didn't find it to do better than about 1 stop. The 200-500 version of the VR gives me several stops of improvement. So I got a new 70-200 with the new VR and found it was significantly better than the old version. Similarly, the 24-70 new version has VR which is as good as the 70-200 new version. At my age I find them to improve things.

As far as the image quality, the old and new versions of the 24-70 are very similar. The old version had an advantage over similar lenses in center sharpness. The new version is pretty close in the center, but better on the edges. Both lenses perform well for IQ and the sharpness is similar overall in the f/8 region.

If you're fairly young and don't have problems with the shakes, the older version of the 24-70 would serve you well. The 24mm end of the range generally doesn't need VR. The 70mm end is at the point where VR starts to become useful, particularly if you're not as steady as you used to be.

Also, if you have a 70-200 you can share the CPL filter between both lenses if you get the older 24-70. Given the relative prices of filters and these lenses, this is a very small point.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

The D850 will make any lens you put on it better. If it were me I would try my 35-70 first and see if focusing improves. If you are not pleased THEN consider a replacement.
Again, if I were you I would put a 24-70 on that camera first and check out the weight. That combo is not lite and you may find it heavy to carry around all the time especially if that would be your only lens.
Speed is not as important as it used to be, with the D850's high ISO use, a f4 would give you great results. Nikon makes a 16-35 and a 24-120 f4 lens. They are both super sharp, but the 24-120 is not light either.And don't leave out Nikon's line of excellent 1.8 primes. The 28 and 35 1.8's are excellent and lite.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Some good info -

https://www.dpreview.com/news/5585760175/nikon-releases-official-d850-lens-recommendation-list
http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/the-d850-blog/the-best-lenses-for-the.html
http://cameratimes.org/best-lenses-nikon-d850/

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

There are SO many great lenses available to you, and everybody here has their favorite. If you really want to stay in the relative-range of the 35-70 f/2.8 you have now, then, YES, buy either of the two 24-70mm you mentioned. And, no, there probably won't be a quantum leap in your picture quality "just because of the lens."

rmm0605 Loc: Atlanta GA

treadwl Loc: South Florida

The Nikon 24-70 f2.8 lens is married to my Nikon D810. It is my go to lens for most shots. I have found it is sharper and has better contrast and works quite well in low light. I have used a D850 and if I owned it, my 24-70 would move to that body. The 14-24 f2.8 lens is a great lens but I do not use it for general use----I want those extra mm in focal length for walking around. In your case, a switch to the 24-70 opens up quite a bit when you consider going from 35mm on the wide end to 24mm. Most of my landscape shots end up between 24 and 28mm.

Brian M Loc: California

Also have a D850, I sold my 24-120 f/4 and bought the non VR 24-70G. Don’t miss the VR and the 24-70 is my favorite lens, it’s amazing and worth every penny.

mak02645

I think that you are getting many viable suggestions to your questions about which lens to use. The 35 - 70mm was a good lens in its day, but covers a very narrow zoom range if you are seeking a single lens. Plus the D850 will not make your copy a better or faster focusing lens. The D850 is such a high resolution camera that it tends to magnify any weaknesses that lenses have. You can't go wrong with Nikon's 24 - 70mm f/2.8 (either version). As mentioned above, the new version is slightly crisper at the edges and has VR, making it a heavy lens. It's also pricey. I'd actually like to second the suggestion that you try the Tamron 24 - 70 f/2.8 (second generation). It is MUCH less expensive than the Nikon and you don't lose much in the way of quality. It has vibration reduction (which Tamron labels VC). It is sharp and has excellent contrast. I've also had good luck with Tamron service. Good luck.