Nikon 24-85mm f2.8--4 AF-D + hood

[missemanuel]

Hello there!

Im looking at buying this lens from someone, now I always get confused, is this a full frame lens or is that the "G" series and what would be a fair price to pay? Iv seen a variety online....



any advice welcome....

 

[Arkady2]

It's an OK lens with a macro facility that works well enough if you just want to get 'a bit closer'.
Assuming you mean this one:

Then it's not the 'G' Series, which by some accounts is a better (and cheaper) lens. You can always spot the difference between a 'G' and older lenses by the lack of aperture ring.

Build-quality feels a bit plasticky compared to more expensive Nikkor lenses, but it works well enough.
Discontinued in 2003, I think, when the 'G' version came out:

 

[missemanuel]

Thanks Rob,

Im looking at it more as it can stop down to 2.8 and of course its a fraction of the cost of the 24 - 70 2.8 which i Just cant afford.

I just want something wider with a bit more flexibility for low light shooting...I have read too the later one is a better lens, but you dont get the 2.8 ....

Im not looking for it as a macro lens as I already have one of those....so im thinking if i can get this at a good price it maybe worth it....

 

[PsiFox]

It is not 2.8 throughout the zoom range though, as it is a min ap of 2.8 to f4 depending on zoom, so, if you are buying it for portrait use at the long end you will not see 2.8

 

[jpw]

Discontinued in 2003, I think, when the 'G' version came out

They actually kept the AF-D one (can still buy it new) and discontinued the G, most reckon they discontinued the wrong one although Photozone.de say the AF-D is the better one and Nikon were right to discontinue the other :shrug:

 

[StewartR]

They actually kept the AF-D one (can still buy it new) and discontinued the G

Amazing but true.

The AF-D version has been in production since 2000. The AF-S G version, with ED glass, was introduced in 2002 and withdrawn in 2006.

I wonder why?

 

[evo456]

Im looking at it more as it can stop down to 2.8 and of course its a fraction of the cost of the 24 - 70 2.8 which i Just cant afford.

..

I wouldn't really consider the 2.8 as a reason to buy this lens. From my unscientific tests, the aperture increases according to focal length (see below) As some have said, it is an average lens, and given the price I would suggest looking at a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 as it's cheaper and has the constant f/2.8

24mm f/2.8
26mm f/3.0
32mm f/3.2
38mm f/3.3
42mm f/3.5
52mm f/3.8
60-85mm f/4.0

 

[missemanuel]

It is not 2.8 throughout the zoom range though, as it is a min ap of 2.8 to f4 depending on zoom, so, if you are buying it for portrait use at the long end you will not see 2.8

ok thanks

They actually kept the AF-D one (can still buy it new) and discontinued the G, most reckon they discontinued the wrong one although Photozone.de say the AF-D is the better one and Nikon were right to discontinue the other :shrug:

I wouldn't really consider the 2.8 as a reason to buy this lens. From my unscientific tests, the aperture increases according to focal length (see below) As some have said, it is an average lens, and given the price I would suggest looking at a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 as it's cheaper and has the constant f/2.8

24mm f/2.8
26mm f/3.0
32mm f/3.2
38mm f/3.3
42mm f/3.5
52mm f/3.8
60-85mm f/4.0

good advice, ill take a look at the Tameron, though do find them a bit noisy when focusing, well my macro is anyway!

thanks everyone!