image request - Nikon 24-70 2.8G on DX body ?

T

thesmileyone

Messages
158
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
As title please.

Thinking of buying a 24-70 with some money i have, will be used on my D70 untill i upgrade to a D700.

It seems a bit pointless to buy the 17-55 2.8G DX as when i upgrade to D700, i wont be able to use that lens....

Ive searched on flickr but all i get is the sigma version...

thankyou
 
pointless request tbh, you're basically asking for pictures of the sweetest spot of a flawless lens

imagine something nice, sprinkled with awesome and surrounded by sexy hotness, that is the image

now go buy it
 
What he said.
I hired one of these for a photoshoot a few weeks ago. Flawless.
The only issue was the weight. Would NOT want to walk around on holiday with this b****r, you really feel it after a couple of hours.

For work / studio though it's impeccable and is the sharpest midrange zoom you can strap to a Nikon.
 
i could take a photo of a d70 with a 24-70 attached if that's any use? :P
 
i took this on Saturday with a D90, 24-70 f2.8

4612751671_8908df35e2_o.jpg
 
thesmileyone said:
Howcome your image is very pixelated when I zoom in, even slightly on it ? at 800kb and straight off the camera it seems a bit iffy ?

Sorry, just trying to see how sharp the pics are with that lens on a dx body.
Click to expand...

because it's sized down to be 800px wide to fit in the forum...

http://www.flickr.com/groups/nikkor_24_70/

here's 19,698 photos taken with this lens in case your mind needed further putting at rest...
 
thesmileyone said:
Howcome your image is very pixelated when I zoom in, even slightly on it ? at 800kb and straight off the camera it seems a bit iffy ?

Sorry, just trying to see how sharp the pics are with that lens on a dx body.
Click to expand...

i spent about 6 months trying to find a reason not to buy this lens too :)

at times i think it's a bit soft, but next thing i know i'm bang on the money again. definately operator error.

not exactly straight from the camera, resized in PS and then a little sharpen for Flickr. Also i had been out on the water all afternoon and noticed i had a lot of salty marks on the lens once back to HQ. You don't have to look too hard to see them.
 
if i remember tommorow i'll take a couple of pictures for you but seriously it's a pointless exercise :)
 
Ok been looking and found more images with the 17-35mm F2.8G pro lens, now this can do the same job as the 14-24mm on a d700 (obviously 3mm higher focal point) and practically most of the 24-70 range on DX.

And its cheaper on onestop than a 24-70 is second hand.

so another question, is the 24-70mm sharper and better image quality at say, 26mm (something both lenses can do) on a d700 and equivalent on an DX sensor ?
 
Errrm how could the lens be less sharp when on a different body?

Ok, stupid questions aside, its quite frankly a staggering piece of glass and I love it to bits when I get my hands on it (my colleague has one).

If you wanted some discouragment though:

1) Its heavy - not a casual walkabout lens, its a proper heavy piece of glass designed for those serious about getting photos, not about anything else.

2) It does emphasise blues. Skys look blue, Red Bull logos look blue, anything in your image thats blue leaps out at you. Me, personally, I like that, others not so much.

3) It costs over a grand and I almost click "buy" a lot on it :D

Here's one from last year with it:

rb1.jpg
 
4372474663_3468873515.jpg


This was taken with the 24-70 on a D300.
If you can afford it buy one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top