AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR

Wesley

Me too I am quiting my job and traveling for 5~6 months this fall and winter and this was going to be my go to lens after I heard the rumors last March, but not now. I guess I will either keep the older 24-70 or pick up a 16-35 for VR at nearly half the weight..Nikkor weight is a major dealbreaker for me. Unless the image quality is revolutionary...

Pack loaded with magical unicorn horn dust.

"20 elements in 16 groups (including 2 ED elements, 1 aspherical ED element, 3 aspherical elements, 1 high-refraction element, and elements with Nano-Crystal or fluorine coatings)"

High-refraction element? $-)

kanuck

The current version scores a 29 overall with 21 sharpness on DXO. If the new version is not at least a 32 with 29 sharpness I am passing on that price, length and weight regardless of how many leprechauns are packed inside.

adamz

one thing I'm concerned most is the build quality. If they improved it than we have a winner. if it's as fragile as the old n24-70/2.8 than the VR will not make me willing to pay for upgrade.

sevencrossing

.....pick up a 16-35 for VR at nearly half the weight..

if weight and sharpness are important, do at least consider the AF-S NIKKOR 20mm f/1.8G ED
sharper and lighter than the 16 -35

safyre

Lol, it's longer, heavier, and uses different filters. Whatever happened to the so-called PF patent that was rumored a few months back?

And at $2400, sheesh, you can get an excellent condition slightly used 24-70 for half that price. Not impressed at all. Unless the image quality is twice as good, which it won't be, do your wallet a favor and get the original or wait until this one drops in price, cause it definitely will sooner rather than later.

heartyfisher

Dunno.. I expect that it will at least catch up to the canon version in IQ and that would mean any Pro will be getting it especially the wedding pros that use this focal range for low light receptions.. I have the Tamron VC version and its really nice in low light bec of the VC.

sevencrossing

According to Nikon it has industry-leading image quality,
given the current state of the industry, nothing to shout about

retread

I have had the old version for about a year and it is doing very well for me. VR would be nice when shooting some low light events. Bigger and heaver may not be a big deal but it still all ads up and the kit is getting heavy if I carry it all day. I want to see a comparison of the old and new before I have any thoughts of an upgrade. I already have a Tokina 11-20 f2.8 so the 82mm filters are not a problem.

I don't think I will be up grading any time soon.

Photobug

With the availability in late August we should see test results the middle of September and national publications by October. Looking forward to the lab results and the comments on user evaluations.

Wesley

The current version scores a 29 overall with 21 sharpness on DXO. If the new version is not at least a 32 with 29 sharpness I am passing on that price, length and weight regardless of how many leprechauns are packed inside.

I can never translate these overall & sharpness numbers into how pictures will be.

Isn't there going to be a new Sigma 24-70? I think that will be for you.

HockeyMan

Well, call me an idiot or a guinea pig or whatever, I just pre-ordered mine. I will post pictures once I get it in late Aug/early Sept.

spraynpray

Well done @HockeyMan, can't wait to see your results.

The current version scores a 29 overall with 21 sharpness on DXO. If the new version is not at least a 32 with 29 sharpness I am passing on that price, length and weight regardless of how many leprechauns are packed inside.

I can never translate these overall & sharpness numbers into how pictures will be.

Isn't there going to be a new Sigma 24-70? I think that will be for you.

I have read that DxO numbers are linear and so if a lens sharpness jumps from 30 to 33 that is 10% increase - or to look at it in another way, for a lens to be twice as sharp, the numbers would have to double. I understand that linear relationship is across the board.

Photobug

One of the things that KR does well is putting tables together. Here is the comparison of the current/old lens and the new one. Scroll down 3/4ths the way down for the comparison table.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/24-70mm-vr.htm

heartyfisher

>:P <- is that a scowl ? :-) a 3/3rd scowl ;-) ok I need to go to bed now ... lack of sleep is driving me crazy ...

kanuck

.....pick up a 16-35 for VR at nearly half the weight..

if weight and sharpness are important, do at least consider the AF-S NIKKOR 20mm f/1.8G ED
sharper and lighter than the 16 -35

Great point especially for use on the D810. The 16-35mm is a bit weak even though it has VR for my trip. I have the old ais 20mm and love it. One problem I have is I want to limit changing lenses as it will be dusty and likely snowing or raining where I will be heading so a nice zoom with VR would be great like this new 24-70 but damn that weight. Which leads to the next point:

Lol, it's longer, heavier, and uses different filters. Whatever happened to the so-called PF patent that was rumored a few months back?

And at $2400, sheesh, you can get an excellent condition slightly used 24-70 for half that price. Not impressed at all. Unless the image quality is twice as good, which it won't be, do your wallet a favor and get the original or wait until this one drops in price, cause it definitely will sooner rather than later.

Yes!! I thought this new 24-70 VR would have the new PF glass as well to cut down on weight for pros who need to lug it around all day at weddings and events or press work. Certainly this plus VR would have bumped the price well over the $3,000 range or maybe Nikon will release an F4 version? Perhaps a 24-70mm VR for their upcoming Mirrorless Full Frame system?

The current version scores a 29 overall with 21 sharpness on DXO. If the new version is not at least a 32 with 29 sharpness I am passing on that price, length and weight regardless of how many leprechauns are packed inside.

I can never translate these overall & sharpness numbers into how pictures will be.

Isn't there going to be a new Sigma 24-70? I think that will be for you.

Generally I like to stay away from 3rd party lenses unless they produce something Nikon or in my case Leica do not offer the consumer. So for example, for me this would be the 15mm Voigtlander F4.5 for the Leica M mount...

Hockeyman, cant wait to see some posts from you! I believe copies will turn up here in Korea at the end of this month or early September if we are lucky. However, the price will likely be $2700 here in Korean Won in order to match the strong US Dollar and weak Yen

WestEndFoto

Looks better in the corners. Otherwise the same.

Regarding the weight, that is what you get for VR. That is one reason I see it as a mostly unnecessary add on for what I shoot. At first glance, it seems the only real reason to upgrade is VR and you have to decide if the weight is worth it.

Wesley

Just watched the new 24-70 Philosophy video and the AF speed is noticeably faster.

WestEndFoto

Just watched the new 24-70 Philosophy video and the AF speed is noticeably faster.

That is definitely worth something.

Msmoto

I will most likely grab one of the new ones if it proves to be better. And, if one looks at the MTF charts, the new version is shaper at 24mm, about the same at 70mm. But, the differences suggest a different lens entirely, improved...yes, improved over the older version.
Construction reveals the new version has 20 elements in 16 groups, the older has 15 elements in 11 groups.

OMG how this stimulates the NAS..... :-((

proudgeek

I'll pass. I use the current one, primarily for landscapes, and I hike with it a lot. I just don't need the extra weight in a pack, nor do I want to buy another set of filters (10 stop, ND grad adapter ring, CPL), although I'm sure that when Nikon upgrades the 70-200 f/2.8 it will take 82mm filters. I'm sure this in many ways is optically superior to the current model and VR would be nice in some low light situations, but for me and the way I use it I frequently slap it on a tripod anyway when light is poor.

HockeyMan

OMG how this stimulates the NAS..... :-((

Ok, I looked all over the forum and I can't find the meaning for the NAS acronym. From context, I'm guessing it means "desire to buy new gear without guaranteed ROI or artistic improvement" Can someone elucidate me?

spraynpray

Nikon Acquisition Syndrome!

HockeyMan

Thanks @spraynpray. This entire forum and blog entices me with NAS. The sad thing is, the things I really want are the ones that cost over $5k+. I have been lusting after the 400mm f/2.8 FL ED VR. I want a D4S, but I'm waiting for the D5. I don't need either, I'm just a hack hobbyist who loves gear, but I really really really want both.

spraynpray

@HockeyMan: There's nothing wrong with that! You do what makes you happy :-)

PB_PM

Nikon, way to figure out what your users want. I don't think bigger and heavier is on that list. VR? Meh. If I wanted that I'd get the Tamron.

Faster AF? Err wow, the 24-70mm F2.8 was already blazing fast.