It's fixed throughout the focal length. For example, if you get a 18-55 kit lens, the aperture varies from f/3.5 to f/5.6 as you zoom in. With the 24-70 f/2.8, it can hold the f/2.8 throughout the whole focal range. Yes, you can still stop it down. I think the min on this lens is f/22.
What a goddamn throwback! The intro, the production, the real world review... It's amazing to see how much cameras have improved, video stabilization, quality, lenses and especially bodies with all the tech and features. The samples you're showing throughout the video look almost like they were snaps made with a toy camera. 🤣 Oh and by the way that lens still rocks even after all these years, slapped on a Z body with the FTZ adapter, it's still incredible, especially for the bargain prices you can get it at. The size is the only thing that makes it less desirable in comparison to the ones in the new generation.
I like the way you shoot. Your framing and capture of the "moment" is sweet. I shoot NIKON and desire to achieve the same excitement of the moment which is what PHOTOGRAPHY is all about. The memory that goes with the shot is forever.
@FinlandApollo Where I live in the US, its the same situation, the 24-70 f2.8 costs about $150-200 USD more than the 17-55, I think prices for Nikon lenses remain consistent across the world regardless of currency exchange
I think it partially is, there is no reason why the couldn't create a good fixed aperture 2.8 lens in that range. After that the push to f2 isn't that difficult mechanically although it will push the size up a lot (i know thats twice more light btw). The push to sub f2 is where I understand you start to get problems optically pushing that extra light through the lens is very difficult especially at the extreme ends...
This 16 yo lens is still rocking on a Nikon D850 DSLR which I own, today. Its just a good lens and the combination of the 2 works fine. Sharp pictures in candle light. And its not even the VR version yet... I'm curious for that to in the future.
@DeSmurfen125 Look mate I set you wrong it WILL WORK with your D5100 - I checked the website on Nikon and the lens is an AF S. So you're good to go. Incidentally the 5100 has a better sensor than the D90. So bonus for you.
you can but you will loose the focal length. The DX bodies have crop sensors so a 50mm FX lens on a 1.5x crop sensor will be really something like 65mm or w/e. THe lens will work, you just wont be at the "right focal length"
@MeineKleineWaffe It all depends on your preference. If you want a wider focal range that i'd go for the 14-24. But in my opinion i'd get the 24-70mm due to the 46mm focal difference. I'm looking in to buying the 24-70mm.
Spoke to my Nikon dealer friend here in Japan, he asked me if I knew about the 24-70mm f/4G coming out next Spring.....there's nothing on the net about it but he does work for Nikon so I'm guessing he is not BSing
This made me remember a question I had. How do you do shots from a moving vehicle without motion blur? What's type of shutter speed, lens, etc would you use?
use a fast shutter speed, any lense will do- preferabaly a fast apertured one so you can use a fast shutter speed & get the right exposure, and one with IS/VR (image stabalisation/ vibration reduction) helps. (also wider angles/focal lengths are good for hiding blurr because it's hard to make it out in such a wid angle cus there's so much stuff in the shot)
wide angle + VR + fast shutter speed, actually with a faster shutter you'll be shocked to see how much detail you can capture at much higher speeds (don't forget you lose light and will be forced to ramp up ISO so obviously there are limitations)
I'd absolutely love to have this lens in my kit. I jut upgraded to a D7000 and my one lens in use is a 35mm 1.8 G (it is a Nikkor). However because I'm studying photography in college and lack the funds to purchase all Nikkor equipment the next two lens I'm purchasing are the Sigma 24-70 2.8 and the Tamron 70-200 2.8. I've used the later on a canon Rebel shooting sports photography and despite the rather basic body the quality was superb!
MunchieMadness420 It would give you an effective 36-105 zoom range on a DX camera. You'd be better off with the DX 24-70mm lens. I've used it, it's very good and a lot smaller.
Thanks for the reply, but i'm going to go for the 70 - 200mm VRII because it's more expensive and i'm going to work at summerbreak so i will buy the 24 - 70mm then :)
Can you do a review of Lumix and Pentax Cameras?? I don't know anything about that brand.. You seemed to be good at reviewing Canon and Nikon Cameras. I want to hear new brands from you. :)
I can't decide between this one or the 70-200vr. I shoot mostly landscapes, cityscape and concerts. I can only afford one and I have a D7100 but will be going full frame to the D800 in a year or so.
I feel the same situation as you, when trying to get group pictures. i realize no space behind me... This lens, which i have works for me well on a D700, 24mm is wide enough for me and 70mm is quite close enough for me. I would'nt say yes if it was placed on a DX...24mm on a DX is still not wide enough, the angle of view is still narrow imo...It seems to me like a walk-around lens to me [it does all the focal lengths i need], but your mileage may vary...
kai can you also do a review on the sigma version of the 24-70? and the tamron 28-75 if yoiu can... please? Im planning to buy the sigma glass and i haven't found any reviews that are quite reliable... i guess im 2nd?
great review! but you failed to mention its an fx lens... how is it in a dx body? can you also do a review on the nikkor 17-55 f2.8 dx? thanks! more power to digital rev!
Hello Kai, can u do a review between Nikon 24-70 2.8 VS Nikon 28-70 2.8 please ? i'm really intersted to buy 28-70 2.8, and i want to know if it's worth. Thank you. Robert.
how fast is the auto focus? is it worth the price or should i just stick with sigma counterpart which is much much cheaper? i'm saving up til xmas and i really hope i won't regret it
I'm stuck between the Nikon 28-300mm 5.6 and the 24-70 2.8! I don't have any specific category of photography, but I need a sharp but versatile lens. (I have a D4S)
how about the Nikon 24-120mm f/4? a fair split between the two you mentioned. the f5.6 is going to be a pain to work with when light isnt at its best and you will only barely get a decent depth of field.
A 28-300 OR a 24-70?!?! How can you be stuck between two things that are so very different? It is like "DO I want steak or Avocado salad for dinner??" You have a D4S and you are asking this??
They were protesting against loss from collapse of securitized US mortgages which were repackaged as interest yielding bonds or accumulators to uninformed consumers. When Lehman collapsed, their contracts collapsed and lost values. This was a shock to them because retail banks advertised them as bonds which actually were securities derivatives with greater risk (but not much better yield)
"Look at that mentalist!" 🤣Honestly, some people make for great images! Love it... I use a D3500 with 2 lenses: Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 and Sigma 70-200 f2.8. great coverage on those. Nice video.
@edkwon Yeah, but sometimes I think, why is it so freaking expensive (17-55). In my opinion, I think that lens doesn't sell well. But, its bit wider than 24-70mm but is it worth of paying so high price?
So this lens apature is fixed at f2.8? or have i got it wrong, cant you stop it down to say f 8 or f11 ?? I would realy like to know im thinking of buying one! Thanks
i notice a rather strange noise when manually turning the focus ring on my 24-70mm. it sounds like you would operate the motor of the lense manually. i called the store and they said the have the same thing on the other models they have in stock. anybody here has noticed the same thing???
@taruzzz Agree with this, if one has no intention of going full frame, then the 17-50 f 2.8 Di II lens is a great value, much moreso than Nikon's way overpriced 17-55 f2.8 DX
If you really want to see these used in realistic photography look on flickr or elsewhere on youtube. Kai i showing the lens in the way thats most comfortable to him. He is also just demonstrating the overall ability of the lens if someone wants to use it in the field or if they want to have a nice depth of field.
Surprisingly no. It's just as good when it launched. A lens makes no difference if you're a beginner or not. You frame your image and shoot. If you get it for a bargain price less than $400 go for it! I got it, paired with a Z body, works perfectly. Most professionals that work here and use Nikon gear, still use this lens. It's new Z mount counterpart is almost $2000 where i live for marginally sharper images (an a lot lighter and smaller package).
Who needs VR (Vibration Reduction)? This is a constant f/2.8 and up to 70mm only - not 400mm. If you're seriously worried about VR in a lens, there's neat gadget called a tripod you should try. I have this lens and never once said to myself, "This needs VR." Kai is right: the ergonomics and build of this lens is amazing. To the person below who said there's a 24-70mm zoom lens that has zero distortion at 24mm: Lies.
hi! can i use an FX format lens on a DX format camera? if not, is there any converters or something that can be used to attach the FX lens on a DX camera? thanks!
I don't see why not.But i don't think you need this lens after all.Stick to some cheaper lens, like 18-70 which is great lens for just a fraction of 24-70price.You lose 1 stop and some image quality, but since you seem to be newby to photography, i'd suggest a cheap lens at first.
What's the point of a lens shade on an overcast/ rainy day? You don't have harsh light coming at you in such conditions. The nano coating on these lenses is also very efficient for tackling flare (I have one of these). The other reason (which is a biggie) - you put a lens hood on it, it is almost as long as a 70-200 f/2.8 on the end of your camera which makes it even more conspicuous than it already is! Hoods have their place, but they really are not required on a full time basis. If you want to go incognito with a body and prime for street shooting, for instance, you don't want to make it even more obvious to would be subject matter that you are aiming your lens at them, and hoods do not help
... but as I mentioned with the 6mm, it would be an interesting lens to make even if its a limited range speciality lens that costs over £10,000. Even just as a learning experience to see how "bad" it would perform, which I personally dont think would be as bad as a lot of people think. But then I love lenses with a bit of distortion and flare/ghosting etc I hate that most modern lenses have removed any character what so ever. The next thing they will homogenise is colour reproduction :sigh:
ahmed Mohamed yes but it will be wasted on a crop sensor. Having the crop will effectively turn it into something like a 38-105mm. Plus any professional seeing that combo will know you don't know what you're doing. Save your money and the the 17-55 2.8 for DX.
Mikey Powell Guess there plenty of professionals using the older 35-70mm f2.8 and 28-70mm f2.8 on DX cameras before the pro level bodies were full frame. But yes, they didn`t know what they were doing either. LOL It is NOT wasted on a DX camera. In fact, you are taking even more advantage of the sharpest parts of the lens. Why waste money on a dedicated DX lens that cannot carry over to full frame or film? I would be asking you don`t know what you are doing with that combination (17-55 DX & crop sensor). Lastly, if you are worried about the wide angle portion of the lens not being wide enough, step back a few steps....problem solved.
You know, Nikon and SIgma or Tamron sell lenses with a big gap of prices for a reason man. Quality and sharpness. I drive a bmw m5 right now, i wouldnt wana put toyota rims on my bimmer ! Its not bad but its not good either. Save up get the real thing, you wont regret it.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
It's fixed throughout the focal length. For example, if you get a 18-55 kit lens, the aperture varies from f/3.5 to f/5.6 as you zoom in. With the 24-70 f/2.8, it can hold the f/2.8 throughout the whole focal range.
Yes, you can still stop it down. I think the min on this lens is f/22.
Damn. Thats want i wanted to know.
This lens will be substantially better than any, 'kit lens' that you mention! 😂
The 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 best bag for photojournalism, around the city, and most everything.
What a goddamn throwback! The intro, the production, the real world review...
It's amazing to see how much cameras have improved, video stabilization, quality, lenses and especially bodies with all the tech and features. The samples you're showing throughout the video look almost like they were snaps made with a toy camera. 🤣
Oh and by the way that lens still rocks even after all these years, slapped on a Z body with the FTZ adapter, it's still incredible, especially for the bargain prices you can get it at. The size is the only thing that makes it less desirable in comparison to the ones in the new generation.
Viendo este video en 2022, solo para recordar buenos viejos tiempos. Me sirvieron Tus videos para aprender muchas cosas. 👏👏👍 gracias de nuevo
I like the way you shoot. Your framing and capture of the "moment" is sweet.
I shoot NIKON and desire to achieve the same excitement of the moment which is what PHOTOGRAPHY is all about. The memory that goes with the shot is forever.
Can you do a review on the new Nikon 24-70mm VR? Would love to see how it compares to the old and whether it is worth the price.
The vr sucks
@FinlandApollo Where I live in the US, its the same situation, the 24-70 f2.8 costs about $150-200 USD more than the 17-55, I think prices for Nikon lenses remain consistent across the world regardless of currency exchange
I think it partially is, there is no reason why the couldn't create a good fixed aperture 2.8 lens in that range. After that the push to f2 isn't that difficult mechanically although it will push the size up a lot (i know thats twice more light btw). The push to sub f2 is where I understand you start to get problems optically pushing that extra light through the lens is very difficult especially at the extreme ends...
This 16 yo lens is still rocking on a Nikon D850 DSLR which I own, today. Its just a good lens and the combination of the 2 works fine. Sharp pictures in candle light. And its not even the VR version yet... I'm curious for that to in the future.
I have 28-70mm 2.8 sigma (I know not the nikkor) for my d750, seems to be my most shot lens in my bag. Fantastic range
Bought this lens 3 days ago... The price a bit steep, but its all worth it. Sharpness, speed, focusing accuracy, color.
I'm a happy man... :)
Are you still happy with it, all these years and photos later?
@@mrtambourineman6107 already changed system to Sony because my works now require both photos and videos, and I find it suits me better
Would love to see a comparison and review vs the newer NIkon 24-70 w/VR.
I actually like these old reviews much more than the recent ones...
Yeah way better cameras too.
@DeSmurfen125 Look mate I set you wrong it WILL WORK with your D5100 - I checked the website on Nikon and the lens is an AF S. So you're good to go. Incidentally the 5100 has a better sensor than the D90. So bonus for you.
you can but you will loose the focal length. The DX bodies have crop sensors so a 50mm FX lens on a 1.5x crop sensor will be really something like 65mm or w/e.
THe lens will work, you just wont be at the "right focal length"
How will it compare with the new 24-70 image stabilized from Canon coming out in 2011. Should be interesting. Good lens.
@MeineKleineWaffe It all depends on your preference. If you want a wider focal range that i'd go for the 14-24. But in my opinion i'd get the 24-70mm due to the 46mm focal difference. I'm looking in to buying the 24-70mm.
Spoke to my Nikon dealer friend here in Japan, he asked me if I knew about the 24-70mm f/4G coming out next Spring.....there's nothing on the net about it but he does work for Nikon so I'm guessing he is not BSing
I wonder how it compares with the current Canon 24-70. (one of the best ever lenses)
just ordered the tamron version of this!
cant wait to see how sharp the f2.8 really is!!!!
I have always wondered what that beeping sound was. Finally found out what it is.
If you are going to visit Hong Kong, taking a tram is a great choice to site visit the whole hong kong island
Great review. Would you have Flash review? Since now, china have been putting out many different flashes that look really.
This made me remember a question I had. How do you do shots from a moving vehicle without motion blur? What's type of shutter speed, lens, etc would you use?
Most of my Photos were taken in a car moving at 120km/s , I use 1/4000s and i have no problem with blur
use a fast shutter speed, any lense will do- preferabaly a fast apertured one so you can use a fast shutter speed & get the right exposure, and one with IS/VR (image stabalisation/ vibration reduction) helps. (also wider angles/focal lengths are good for hiding blurr because it's hard to make it out in such a wid angle cus there's so much stuff in the shot)
wide angle + VR + fast shutter speed, actually with a faster shutter you'll be shocked to see how much detail you can capture at much higher speeds (don't forget you lose light and will be forced to ramp up ISO so obviously there are limitations)
as high of a shutter speed you can do in the lighting, and the sharpest lens you have
I'd absolutely love to have this lens in my kit. I jut upgraded to a D7000 and my one lens in use is a 35mm 1.8 G (it is a Nikkor). However because I'm studying photography in college and lack the funds to purchase all Nikkor equipment the next two lens I'm purchasing are the Sigma 24-70 2.8 and the Tamron 70-200 2.8. I've used the later on a canon Rebel shooting sports photography and despite the rather basic body the quality was superb!
Why would you want to put this lens (FX) on a D7000 (DX)
Because they're compatible? At least most FX lenses can be used on a DX body since newer DX bodies by Nikon are made to use both lenses.
MunchieMadness420 It would give you an effective 36-105 zoom range on a DX camera. You'd be better off with the DX 24-70mm lens. I've used it, it's very good and a lot smaller.
Thanks for the tip, never really thought of that however I have to for Sigma or Tamron at least for now so I'm getting their DX model
Amazing lens a must add! but too expensive. I have used it a lot provided by the studio with 7100, produces amazing results.
Thanks for the reply, but i'm going to go for the 70 - 200mm VRII because it's more expensive and i'm going to work at summerbreak so i will buy the 24 - 70mm then :)
Can you do a review of Lumix and Pentax Cameras?? I don't know anything about that brand.. You seemed to be good at reviewing Canon and Nikon Cameras. I want to hear new brands from you. :)
I can't decide between this one or the 70-200vr. I shoot mostly landscapes, cityscape and concerts. I can only afford one and I have a D7100 but will be going full frame to the D800 in a year or so.
Probably the 24-70 as it looks like you need the wider focal lengths more then the tele. Hopefully at your concerts you can get close to the stage.
if u'll be going FX, then 24-70mm f2.8 is the logical choice.
I feel the same situation as you, when trying to get group pictures. i realize no space behind me...
This lens, which i have works for me well on a D700, 24mm is wide enough for me and 70mm is quite close enough for me. I would'nt say yes if it was placed on a DX...24mm on a DX is still not wide enough, the angle of view is still narrow imo...It seems to me like a walk-around lens to me [it does all the focal lengths i need], but your mileage may vary...
Great review! When will you be reviewing the new VR version?
I SO miss these guys!
kai can you also do a review on the sigma version of the 24-70? and the tamron 28-75 if yoiu can... please? Im planning to buy the sigma glass and i haven't found any reviews that are quite reliable... i guess im 2nd?
@DeSmurfen125 Yup. You need to get a D7000 or D90 upwards for the non-hypersonic lenses to autofocus.
great review! but you failed to mention its an fx lens... how is it in a dx body?
can you also do a review on the nikkor 17-55 f2.8 dx? thanks! more power to digital rev!
We want to know what's in your camera bag Kai!
what a beautiful city
Would you recommend this or the Nikon 70 - 200mm f2,8 for portrait and group photos?
excellent video, getting this lens when the d800 lens is released later this year :)
Hello Kai, can u do a review between Nikon 24-70 2.8 VS Nikon 28-70 2.8 please ? i'm really intersted to buy 28-70 2.8, and i want to know if it's worth.
Thank you.
Robert.
how fast is the auto focus? is it worth the price or should i just stick with sigma counterpart which is much much cheaper? i'm saving up til xmas and i really hope i won't regret it
Question: Why do you never use a lens hood?
this is like top gear for cameras n lenses! I love this guy!
That is EXACTLY what I was thinking watching this.
I'm scared to buy this lens because its been out for a so long time. Maybe they will have a replacement? What do you think?
2 nikon videos in a day! Yeah !!!
I'm stuck between the Nikon 28-300mm 5.6 and the 24-70 2.8! I don't have any specific category of photography, but I need a sharp but versatile lens. (I have a D4S)
how about the Nikon 24-120mm f/4? a fair split between the two you mentioned. the f5.6 is going to be a pain to work with when light isnt at its best and you will only barely get a decent depth of field.
Thanks for the advice!
A 28-300 OR a 24-70?!?! How can you be stuck between two things that are so very different? It is like "DO I want steak or Avocado salad for dinner??" You have a D4S and you are asking this??
24-70mm f2.8 + D4S is the SIMPLIEST, PERFECT combination
Tamron 24-70 2.8 with vibration is an awesome alternative. Same optical quality. Great lens. Build is better with Nikon but this thing is great.
@MrTarff Yah but, if it had VR and as it has an F2.8 aperture, it would then be the prefect lens for low light shooting.
@newnhamlea1 I believe the bokeh's of the 2 lens were done a couple of days ago.
getting the sigma or the tamron version of this divine glass!
I got the Nikkor 24-85mm and its pretty nice but not great like these lenses!!!!!
I have this lens and I love it. I always use the 24mm for landscape which is the sharpest focal of this lens.
do you recommend me getting this for my D5100 just for daily use? and can it have a fisheye lens put onto it? please reply!
i just got this lens. sooo pleased! it has treated me well these past few days, with many many more to come :)
i noticed on a few of the videos that you dont use any filters is they a reason for it??
They were protesting against loss from collapse of securitized US mortgages which were repackaged as interest yielding bonds or accumulators to uninformed consumers. When Lehman collapsed, their contracts collapsed and lost values. This was a shock to them because retail banks advertised them as bonds which actually were securities derivatives with greater risk (but not much better yield)
"Look at that mentalist!" 🤣Honestly, some people make for great images! Love it...
I use a D3500 with 2 lenses: Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 and Sigma 70-200 f2.8. great coverage on those. Nice video.
Would love to see how you guys do post processing of the photos. Great vid btw!
@tcuk new lens. so full retail price of course :) it was slightly on sale i believe. and it ran me about $1800CND
Can u also do one of the big tele reviews too? like the range 300 - 800mm :p
Can you do a review 'bout the 17-55mm 2.8?
@edkwon Yeah, but sometimes I think, why is it so freaking expensive (17-55). In my opinion, I think that lens doesn't sell well. But, its bit wider than 24-70mm but is it worth of paying so high price?
@MapleKaomiii i think it's the Full Frame Nikon D700.
@hannahgrade You can use any lens for DX or FX Nikons.
So this lens apature is fixed at f2.8? or have i got it wrong, cant you stop it down to say
f 8 or f11 ??
I would realy like to know im thinking of buying one!
Thanks
@hongfei95 a 2.8 24-70 doesnt need vr mate cuz at 2.8 u let alot of light in
i notice a rather strange noise when manually turning the focus ring on my 24-70mm. it sounds like you would operate the motor of the lense manually. i called the store and they said the have the same thing on the other models they have in stock. anybody here has noticed the same thing???
@taruzzz Agree with this, if one has no intention of going full frame, then the 17-50 f 2.8 Di II lens is a great value, much moreso than Nikon's way overpriced 17-55 f2.8 DX
@shahrulita I've rented that lens for my D7000. Works well.
kai, why dont you ever use a lense hood?!
explain! :D
Please test out the Nikon 85mm f/1.4G Review BY ITSELF! :D, it's one of those magical gold-ring primes you haven't test/reviewed yet!!! =)
hey kai. would you recommend this lens for avid street photographers? cheers~
found it for second hand costing 700pounds. very very tempted
Any suggestions for lenses comparable to this one, that doesn't cost $1000?
is this good for filming for outdoor sports? 24-70mm f4
If you really want to see these used in realistic photography look on flickr or elsewhere on youtube. Kai i showing the lens in the way thats most comfortable to him. He is also just demonstrating the overall ability of the lens if someone wants to use it in the field or if they want to have a nice depth of field.
Is this lens too much to handle for a beginner (me!) ? I have just bought a D600 body. I realize that I'm a bit late for the party 🥳
Surprisingly no. It's just as good when it launched. A lens makes no difference if you're a beginner or not. You frame your image and shoot. If you get it for a bargain price less than $400 go for it! I got it, paired with a Z body, works perfectly. Most professionals that work here and use Nikon gear, still use this lens. It's new Z mount counterpart is almost $2000 where i live for marginally sharper images (an a lot lighter and smaller package).
How much does the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 currently in Hong Kong?
love your reviews, subscribed))
Is this lens good with DX cameras as well like my D7000?
Who needs VR (Vibration Reduction)? This is a constant f/2.8 and up to 70mm only - not 400mm. If you're seriously worried about VR in a lens, there's neat gadget called a tripod you should try. I have this lens and never once said to myself, "This needs VR."
Kai is right: the ergonomics and build of this lens is amazing.
To the person below who said there's a 24-70mm zoom lens that has zero distortion at 24mm: Lies.
that photo of lok that kai took was really good
@Shardayyy I know that, I was refering to more general stuff such as Ca, sharpness and light fall off
I want an all-purpose lens and it's a battle between Nikon 17-55/24-70 | Sigma 17-50/24-70 | Tamron 17-50/24-70..
hi! can i use an FX format lens on a DX format camera? if not, is there any converters or something that can be used to attach the FX lens on a DX camera? thanks!
Should i get this lens or the nikon 14-24mm f2.8?
I don't see why not.But i don't think you need this lens after all.Stick to some cheaper lens, like 18-70 which is great lens for just a fraction of 24-70price.You lose 1 stop and some image quality, but since you seem to be newby to photography, i'd suggest a cheap lens at first.
Ye did you noticed this lens is like a T 4.0 @ 2.8 ?
Or did you noticed anything ?
What Nikon camera are you using?
The day someone invents a 14-300mm f/0.95 is the day the brand wars will be over.
What is your objection to lens shades? I see you review many lenses that come with the ability to attach a lens shade but you do not.
What's the point of a lens shade on an overcast/ rainy day? You don't have harsh light coming at you in such conditions. The nano coating on these lenses is also very efficient for tackling flare (I have one of these). The other reason (which is a biggie) - you put a lens hood on it, it is almost as long as a 70-200 f/2.8 on the end of your camera which makes it even more conspicuous than it already is! Hoods have their place, but they really are not required on a full time basis. If you want to go incognito with a body and prime for street shooting, for instance, you don't want to make it even more obvious to would be subject matter that you are aiming your lens at them, and hoods do not help
RobertKaydoo i don't use one so my Nano coating gets a workout ;p
Nikon Rocks !
Video posted in 2010. Not sure what you mean by old ones
... but as I mentioned with the 6mm, it would be an interesting lens to make even if its a limited range speciality lens that costs over £10,000. Even just as a learning experience to see how "bad" it would perform, which I personally dont think would be as bad as a lot of people think. But then I love lenses with a bit of distortion and flare/ghosting etc I hate that most modern lenses have removed any character what so ever. The next thing they will homogenise is colour reproduction :sigh:
can you please review the NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D
@EpicMustacheMan dude, why do say that? i hope you realize some nikon lends can fit canon cameras. i just wanted to know if this one can do the same.
Will you get the same results ( sharpness contrast and colors) on a DX camera ?
ahmed Mohamed yes but it will be wasted on a crop sensor. Having the crop will effectively turn it into something like a 38-105mm. Plus any professional seeing that combo will know you don't know what you're doing. Save your money and the the 17-55 2.8 for DX.
Thank you
Mikey Powell
Guess there plenty of professionals using the older 35-70mm f2.8 and 28-70mm f2.8 on DX cameras before the pro level bodies were full frame. But yes, they didn`t know what they were doing either. LOL
It is NOT wasted on a DX camera. In fact, you are taking even more advantage of the sharpest parts of the lens. Why waste money on a dedicated DX lens that cannot carry over to full frame or film? I would be asking you don`t know what you are doing with that combination (17-55 DX & crop sensor). Lastly, if you are worried about the wide angle portion of the lens not being wide enough, step back a few steps....problem solved.
please review nikon 14-24mm!
could you possibly put this on a d7000?
my favorite line is. "its about as mystical, as a unicorn"
You know, Nikon and SIgma or Tamron sell lenses with a big gap of prices for a reason man. Quality and sharpness. I drive a bmw m5 right now, i wouldnt wana put toyota rims on my bimmer ! Its not bad but its not good either. Save up get the real thing, you wont regret it.
Is this lens better than the Canon 24-70 f2.8? Is it sharper?
Im really considering buying this lens but read that this lens has a zoom ring issue. Anyone with that experience?