which 24-70 for my d800

alipeo

alipeo

Messages
70
Name
alastair
Edit My Images
Yes
Evening all, now im a proud new owner of a d800 I would like to treat it to a new lens, I have the nikon 17-55 which i will be selling soon to help fund the 24-70. I know the 17-55 is an amazing lens but it doesnt work to its full potential on the d800, i would like a lens to use on both my d800 and d7100.

In the line up are the nikon, tamron and sigma.

Nikon = expensive but the best ( so ive heard/read) £1200
Tamron = excellent quality with vibration control, mid priced £800
sigma = cheaper and bottom of the pile compared to others ( so ive heard/read) £550

i dont know if i should just bite the bullet and spend the £1200 on the nikon, I dont work professionally so im not gonna make the money back, im just an amateur who dabbles with portraits and landscapes.

any experience with any of the lenses and suggestions welcome, ive got around £800 but could save for the rest if i waited. ( £800 burning hole in pocket)

many thanks Ali
 
If it was me, not having compromised on the body, I wouldn't be comprising on the glass. I use the nikon day & daily and can highly recommend it. Not that I've done tests etc. I just think it does a good job. No experience of your other options.
 
Do you mind 2nd hand? A Nikon 24-70 goes for £750-800 on the Classifieds here.
 
stumeech said:
Do you mind 2nd hand? A Nikon 24-70 goes for £750-800 on the Classifieds here.
Click to expand...

thanks, had seen this and a little hesitant to go for it, only bcos my brother has the 17-55 like me and his had no end of problems even after coming back from nikon for repair allbeit nikon france!!
 
Gary Coyle said:
Still over priced
Click to expand...

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I have a 28-75 which I think is excellent but I do wish it went to 24mm for use a walk about lens. As Ali was asking about 24-70s I just felt it was worth highlighting how he could save money buying a 2nd hand one.
 
Nikon has cashback on the 24-70 at the moment, £175 off I think, bringing it to just over £1000 new!
 
just be aware that tamron lens may have some QC issues. just do a quick google on FM forums for Tamron 24-70. but tamron would be the pick to be fair. lens optics on par with Nikon and features VC which is highly useful. weather sealed body goings well with the D800 which is also weather sealed.

only down side is the 82mm filter making sourcing filters hard and expensive.

I have 28-70 nikon wont be upgrading any time soon until maybe nikon bring out the 24-70 VR and hope nikon has better QC

not sure about the sigma, heard it is soft
 
Last edited:
andy1868 said:
Nikon has cashback on the 24-70 at the moment, £175 off I think, bringing it to just over £1000 new!
Click to expand...

did see this in wex, which also makes it so tempting!

ricky1980 said:
just be aware that tamron lens may have some QC issues. just do a quick google on FM forums for Tamron 24-70. but tamron would be the pick to be fair. lens optics on par with Nikon and features VC which is highly useful. weather sealed body goings well with the D800 which is also weather sealed.

only down side is the 82mm filter making sourcing filters hard and expensive.

I have 28-70 nikon wont be upgrading any time soon until maybe nikon bring out the 24-70 VR and hope nikon has better QC

not sure about the sigma, heard it is soft
Click to expand...

the 88mm filter was the only thing i had pondered about really, wanting to get a 10stop and this would make it more expensive.
 
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 non BIM (the one with the aperture ring)

Rarely off my d800. Does the job very well for me. I got mine for the pricely sum of 200 quid. Pound for pound, value wise, best lens I own.

Got quite a few on my Flickr using this combo!
 
Last edited:
ricky1980 said:
just be aware that tamron lens may have some QC issues. just do a quick google on FM forums for Tamron 24-70. but tamron would be the pick to be fair. lens optics on par with Nikon and features VC which is highly useful. weather sealed body goings well with the D800 which is also weather sealed.

only down side is the 82mm filter making sourcing filters hard and expensive.

I have 28-70 nikon wont be upgrading any time soon until maybe nikon bring out the 24-70 VR and hope nikon has better QC

not sure about the sigma, heard it is soft
Click to expand...
Best IQ of any mid range zoom lens i ever put on any camera but expensive, a little bit of CA but easy to get rif of
 
thanks for all the comments, i may have just bought the tamron!! will let you know my thoughts when it arrives
 
Tamron beat the Nikon in amateur photographer group test also.
 
I had the Nikon, great lens, but I also feel it's over priced considering what competition is out there. I sold it a while back, but if I ever get another 24-70, it'll be the tamron.
 
I would be cautious about the build quality of the Tamron. I was sponsored by them for years, when Johnsons Photopia (Newcastle-u-Lyme) were the distributor, it helped to get me going, but the build quality f the lenses meant they were forever becoming loose - elements or groups. The optical performance is relatively easy to create, especially with modern manufacturing, but the physical build quality of Nikon is worth the extra. I have had mine since they first came out and it still earns us our keep. It goes to sea with me most weeks, gets doused in saltwater, gets banged and bumped about - yet it still performs flawlessly. If I was in the market for another one I would look for a good used one - if you are the usual careful amateur owner then it will cost you NOTHING, because you will get your money back if you came to sell it....the Tamron will not hold the value in the same way. I have had Nikon lenses I made money on by keeping them, because the price went up over their life increasing the second hand value to above what I paid. However, it is your money, you do what you like, but I wouldn't be looking at pretty inobjective graphs - I would be looking at professional images from the plethora of full time professionals that use the lens for their living. I would imagine you might have a job finding the same number of photographers who rely on their lens using the Tamron. Just my take on it.
 
People have had numerous issues with Nikon gear too!

I bought a used Tamron 17-50 2.8 years ago, it was 'third hand' basically, 2 previous owners. It was one of the best lenses I ever owned, including some very expensive glass I've bought over the past few years for FF. Only sold it on because I was making the jump from DX. And I got what I paid for it, and last I heard the guy who bought it is loving it just as much as I did.

'Third party' lenses are not always iffy or dodgy, there will be stories about all makes and models if you really dig deep enough.

Nothing wrong with Tamron lenses. Sure you might be very unlucky and get a dud ... but you could get an iffy Nikon too. For 3 times the cost.
 
I just had the same dilemma.
The Nikon & Tamron are equal on image quality imo. They both have subtle weaknesses in different areas.
The Nikon is a far superior build quality over the Tamron.
The Tamron has VC and very fast focus,
You missed a deal too, 5% off at Jessops with 12 months interest free finance.
Tamron UK (Intro2020) & Tamron Japan say there are no problems with the lens ans it is their biggest seller.
It also has the long warranty so problems, if they occur, are free to fix.
The current Nikon deal makes it a much closer call.
I think if you get paid for photography buy the Nikon.
Anything else and the Tamron is the lens to go for.
Btw the VC is awesome for low light shooting.
 
The Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 is incredibly sharp and very solidly built. The optical quality is superb. Nikon lenses hold their price well in the 2nd hand market but I doubt i would ever part with mine.

York Minster taken at f/8 1/40s @ ISO 400 at approx 70mm

 
Blank_Canvas said:
The Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 is incredibly sharp and very solidly built. The optical quality is superb. Nikon lenses hold their price well in the 2nd hand market but I doubt i would ever part with mine.
Click to expand...
Well theres one for sale on here for £750 and its not shifting, these were selling for £1000 last year
 
i dont get paid for my work, and when i do its doing favors for friends or local ice hockey team, I had money saved up for a car and spent half of that on the d800 so spending more on a new lens isnt helping the car fund!!
I have already purchased the tamron so i will see how it goes, if im not happy then i will sell on and get the nikon.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Stiff ring and a bit of damage ? - probably the right price.

You can still get 1K + if it's mint condition and boxed.
Click to expand...
Nah, not even on Ebay will anyone pay £1000, heres the sold listings, not a single one over £1,000 http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/Lenses-/3..._Sold=1&_nkw=NIKON+24-70MM&rt=nc&LH_PrefLoc=1

Even Grays the most expensive secondhand retailer have a mint one for under £1000, MPB have 10, all under £900, people just arent paying that sort of money for a so so lens

Even the full res of York Minster you posted isnt sharp anywhere across the frame
 
stumeech said:
I hope Blank_Canvas doesn't mind my saying, but that's camera shake that's caused that not the lens itself.
Click to expand...
To be fair, i was leaning that way myself with 1/40th, it clearly shows up in the various texts dotted around the shop displays eyc, etc, the fore and midground, yet you dont see that affect in the minster lines, cables etc.

Should have opted for the Tamron with VC LOL

Apologies Blank Canvas, i seem to be in a funny mood this weekend
 
Last edited:
Gary Coyle said:
Nah, not even on Ebay will anyone pay £1000, heres the sold listings, not a single one over £1,000 http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/Lenses-/3..._Sold=1&_nkw=NIKON+24-70MM&rt=nc&LH_PrefLoc=1

Even Grays the most expensive secondhand retailer have a mint one for under £1000, MPB have 10, all under £900, people just arent paying that sort of money for a so so lens

Even the full res of York Minster you posted isnt sharp anywhere across the frame
Click to expand...

Supply and demand I guess, the market becoming flooded and pushing prices down, possibly due to a large number of people ditching FF and moving over to CSCs possibly.

By and large Nikon lenses do hold there value well, probably better than Nikon cameras. My Minster image was taken at f/8 it's not a bad example of sharpness at that aperture. Why not post one of yours up at f/8 ? Lens comparisons and images always make interesting reading.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Supply and demand I guess, the market becoming flooded and pushing prices down, possibly due to a large number of people ditching FF and moving over to CSCs possibly.

By and large Nikon lenses do hold there value well, probably better than Nikon cameras. My Minster image was taken at f/8 it's not a bad example of sharpness at that aperture. Why not post one of yours up at f/8 ? Lens comparisons and images always make interesting reading.
Click to expand...
You just missed my edit BC, i added an apology
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Supply and demand I guess, the market becoming flooded and pushing prices down, possibly due to a large number of people ditching FF and moving over to CSCs possibly.
Why not post one of yours up at f/8 ? Lens comparisons and images always make interesting reading.
Click to expand...
I only have the 24-85mm VR at the mo but i genuinley got fed up posting full res images of my old Tamron 28-75mm kicking the 24-70mm's butt
 
Gary Coyle said:
To be fair, i was leaning that way myself with 1/40th, it clearly shows up in the various texts dotted around the shop displays eyc, etc, the fore and midground, yet you dont see that affect in the minster lines, cables etc.

Should have opted for the Tamron with VC LOL

Apologies Blank Canvas, i seem to be in a funny mood this weekend
Click to expand...

No worries Gary I did think you were in a bit of a truculent mood, or got out of bed the wrong side but we all
have off days. You're not normally on one. Anyway tomorrow is another day. :) I hope you feel better in your self and I'm trying to say that in a friendly way without being patronising. Not always easy on these forums, sometimes things are not always received in the spirit in which they were intended.

From my own perspective, I really hate using a high ISO it stems from my many years in forensic photography where I basically shot everything on a tripod, with the smallest aperture (f22 / f18) etc and the lowest ISO to get corner-to-corner sharpness. These days I still
Hate shooting above 400 ISO, but living in the centre of York I don't always take a tripod out with me every time time I leave the house. It's a trip hazard ! I never leave the house house with out a camera though because there is always something going on or something to photograph. I just grab shots where I can. Using the lowest ISO sometimes gives rise to camera shake it's a real trade off.
 
minnnt said:
Did you say they had crap build quality when you were sponsored by them?
Click to expand...

I didn't need to - the constant trips to newcastle with them to be exchanged told them all they needed to know. In return they had pictures from me for marketing material. I used to do a regular column in a photographic magazine at the time...I can't even remember what it was called, but that wasn't one of Willy's. It was published from an office in Brighton. It paid the mortgage even if it was a rubbish title by EMAP standards. I didn't promote the lenses, I just supplied images using them and got the gear in return. The 80s were a far cry from today's market with the budgets that were available, publishing was awash with money - IPC womens titles group employed a lady whose sole job was to order and distribute the flowers for the office! She did nothing else.

Tamron glass is pretty good, it is the build quality of the carriers and engineering aspects that let them down. The old 90mm macro was always seen as one of the lenses to beat - and that one was pretty well built, it was often used as a portrait lens. The zoom lenses always came apart at the seams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top