Will Nikon discontinued AF-S 24-70mm F/2.8 non-VR anytime soon? Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC good option?

eric727

Hi!

As per my last discussion, I planned to upgrade from D7000 to D810 next year. I wanted to build the FX lens combo before the upgrade.

Was wonder since AF-S 24-70mm F/2.8 VR has released last year, will Nikon discontinued the non-VR version soon?

The lens combo that I have in mind are as follows:

1. AF-S 16-35 f/4G VR
2. AF-S 24-70 f/2.8 non-VR
3. AF-S 70-200 f/2.8G VRII

After reading some of reviews on the web and forums, the Tamron seems a good alternative for Nikon non-VR 24-70mm as the VR version is too expensive for my budget. Is it really a good alternative?

For the wide angle, I believe 16-35mm F/4 is a much more practical option than 14-24mm F/2.8.

For the telephoto, although the Nikon version is suffering in heavy lens breathing, but i believe the optics is unbeatable, just wonder whether Nikon planned to upgrade this lens in these 1 -2 years?

Would appreciated your comments.

Thank you.

NSXTypeR

Nikon tends to sell older lenses for a while after the new lenses come out. When they plan to discontinue the 24-70 is unsure, I think.

The older one is still available at B and H.

heartyfisher

Depends ;-)

I have the Tamron 24-70 VC. Its a nice lens very good in most things and nothing really bad. With the price difference you can forgive much of its slight weaknesses. Which are :
1) the focal range is very slightly different at normal closer distances. Can be up to 22-60mm, due to focus breathing. Its good for me as I am not a wide angle shooter so I don't often carry a less than 24 mm lense. Infact this is one of the reasons I went for it so for me it was a positive not a negative.

2) The Bokeh balls is a bit nervous. Not really noticeable in most situations. However its is there especially if you have bright highlights in the background.

As I said I dont usually go wide. But if I were to get one I would look into the new Tokina wide angle zoom lenses. 16-28 F2.8 or 17-35 F4

WestEndFoto

If you have 35 and below on the wide end and 70 and above on the long end, do you need the mid-range zoom? You might, but buying the holy trinity is not the best option just because it is the Holy Trinity. Maybe a fast 50mm prime will give you something different and save money. Or maybe upgrade to the 24-70 VR and trade the wide zoom for the 20mm 1.8?

eric727

NSXTypeR said:

Nikon tends to sell older lenses for a while after the new lenses come out. When they plan to discontinue the 24-70 is unsure, I think.

The older one is still available at B and H.

Hi NSXTypeR,

Thanks for your comment.

I went to a Nikon center yesterday, they do not displace the 24-70mm non-VR anymore, only found the VR version.

If Nikon tends to discontinued non-VR version, I might have to prioritize the purchase of 24-70mm. I am actually thinking to buy 70-200mm this month.

manhattanboy

WestEndFoto said:

If you have 35 and below on the wide end and 70 and above on the long end, do you need the mid-range zoom? You might, but buying the holy trinity is not the best option just because it is the Holy Trinity. Maybe a fast 50mm prime will give you something different and save money. Or maybe upgrade to the 24-70 VR and trade the wide zoom for the 20mm 1.8?

I sort of agree with WestEndFoto's post in that you should think about how you will use the 810. If you are updating next year, hopefully the 810 replacement will be out: will you be buying that one or the old 810?
I rarely shoot wide, so for me to invest in premium wide glass is a waste, but for you it sounds like that is really important. You have to know what you are shooting, and buy accordingly. The 2.8 mid and tele zooms are heavy; make sure you really need 2.8 before buying. If you are shooting the 810 wide at 24mm, chances are that you are not going to be at 2.8, and if you need f11 for depth of field at 24mm, then maybe VR is going to be useful if handholding.
The one thing I recommend is reading about the interface changes from the 7000 to the 810. They handle pretty differently.

eric727

WestEndFoto said:

If you have 35 and below on the wide end and 70 and above on the long end, do you need the mid-range zoom? You might, but buying the holy trinity is not the best option just because it is the Holy Trinity. Maybe a fast 50mm prime will give you something different and save money. Or maybe upgrade to the 24-70 VR and trade the wide zoom for the 20mm 1.8?

Hi WestEndFoto,

Thanks for your comment.

I am also thinking to swap the 16-35mm F/4 with a 20mm F/1.8. It is lighter and larger aperture.

Perhaps will purchase both, just not sure how often I will use the 16mm as I have never experience 16mm before, the widest that I used on my DX was only 28mm, which is not wide enough to my taste.

The most use range in my photo are 28-60mm (coverted to 35mm) actually, i do have 35mm prime, it is nice especially able to stop down to F/1.8, but it is just not so convenient while i am on travel.

Some attractions are very crowded, I have to take quite shoot from a small group shoot to head shoot and the space are somehow limited in some case. Thus, a mid-range zoom is definitely useful for my usage.

Holy Trinity meant nothing to me, if I really go after it, 14-24mm F/2.8 will definitely in my list.

eric727

heartyfisher said:

Depends ;-)

I have the Tamron 24-70 VC. Its a nice lens very good in most things and nothing really bad. With the price difference you can forgive much of its slight weaknesses. Which are :
1) the focal range is very slightly different at normal closer distances. Can be up to 22-60mm, due to focus breathing. Its good for me as I am not a wide angle shooter so I don't often carry a less than 24 mm lense. Infact this is one of the reasons I went for it so for me it was a positive not a negative.

2) The Bokeh balls is a bit nervous. Not really noticeable in most situations. However its is there especially if you have bright highlights in the background.

As I said I dont usually go wide. But if I were to get one I would look into the new Tokina wide angle zoom lenses. 16-28 F2.8 or 17-35 F4

Hi heartyfisher,

Thanks for your comment.

Your feedback on the Tamron 24-74mm F/2.8 VC is exactly same as what Nasim commented in his review. It seem he really honest on the review ^^

https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-24-70mm-f2-8

Recently there are few firmware upgrade from third party lens due to the new camera launching, this actually hold me back. Was wonder the third party lens manufacturer will continue support after 5 - 8 years?

Some Japanese magazine is actually recommended Tamron than Nikon, in fact, they rank Tamron at 2nd place in mid-range zoom, the first is of course the Canon 24-70mm mkII.

eric727

heartyfisher said:

Depends ;-)

I have the Tamron 24-70 VC. Its a nice lens very good in most things and nothing really bad. With the price difference you can forgive much of its slight weaknesses. Which are :
1) the focal range is very slightly different at normal closer distances. Can be up to 22-60mm, due to focus breathing. Its good for me as I am not a wide angle shooter so I don't often carry a less than 24 mm lense. Infact this is one of the reasons I went for it so for me it was a positive not a negative.

2) The Bokeh balls is a bit nervous. Not really noticeable in most situations. However its is there especially if you have bright highlights in the background.

As I said I dont usually go wide. But if I were to get one I would look into the new Tokina wide angle zoom lenses. 16-28 F2.8 or 17-35 F4

Hi heartyfisher,

Thanks for your comment.

Your feedback on the Tamron 24-74mm F/2.8 VC is exactly same as what Nasim commented in his review. It seem he really honest on the review ^^

https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-24-70mm-f2-8

Recently there are few firmware upgrade from third party lens due to the new camera launching, this actually hold me back. Was wonder the third party lens manufacturer will continue support after 5 - 8 years?

Some Japanese magazine is actually recommended Tamron than Nikon, in fact, they rank Tamron at 2nd place in mid-range zoom, the first is of course the Canon 24-70mm mkII.