Nikon Lens Questions....

[wibbly]

A quick question about Nikon lenses

I can recognise the difference in price due to f3.5 -v- f2.8 but I'm wondering if a 24-70mm (approx. £1,165) is really worth that much more than a 17-55mm (£865), and conversely is a 17-55mm worth that much more over a 16-85mm (£395).

Opinions most welcome!

 

[fracster]

17-55 is a DX lens.A very good one.

24-70 is FX compatible, also a very good lens.

16-85, can`t comment,I have never had one.

 

[Lensflare]

Fixed aperture throughout the range versus changing aperture with zoom.

The 24-70 f2.8. Because of the image circle size, fast aperture which remains throughout the range as you zoom, nano coating etc and AFS is a higher spec lens than the 16-85 where there is a variable aperture according to the zoomed focal length.

Build quality of the actual barrel and housings too. All glass (with ED glass elements) in the 24-70.

You are comparing a top end pro spec lens built to give long service in harsh, hard conditions with a kit lens for hobby use.

You might as well ask is a 300 AFS f2.8 really worth £4000 when you can get a 300 f4 for £1000.......there is a lot more to the more expensive lens. Like anything, if you want top quality, you have ot pay for it.
Why is a Mercedes E320 more expensive than a Ford Mondeo? They both have 5 seats and will take you to the outlaws for Boxing Day dinner!

 

[Arkady]

I've not used the 16-85, but I have used the other two.

The 17-55 f/2.8 was OK, but nowhere near as good as my much older 17-35 f/2.8. I had occasional focussing problems: the example I trialled kept failing to AF until removed from the camera and put back on again - probably an electrical contact glitch - I used it for two weeks in Malawi during the rainy season (very hot, humid and wet), then for three weeks in Afghanistan (winter; cold and rainy) and them a month in Denmark and Norway (snow - very cold), so it got quite a work-out.

The 24-70 f/2.8 is very good indeed, but again perhaps not quite as good as my older 28-70 f/2.8, although it is much lighter than the old lens.
I certainly have no worries about using it out here - very sharp and the portraits I've done with it compare favourably to the 50mm f/1.4 I also use out here.

 

[wibbly]

Thanks for the answers It's an interesting learning experience figuring out what's best