My first impressions about 24-70 F2.8...

[photoforfun]

I just got this lens this week after a long debate with myself about the pros and cons. Until now, while using it occasional indoors, I'm a bit disappointed...
This lens is tacksharp from F2.8 upwards, little distortion from 28mm upwards, gives incredible beautiful bokeh, object seems to pop-up like 3D, contrast and colours are great and AF is nearly instant and always dead on...
But...
...it lacks VR. After having been spoiled by the 24-105 IF last year on my Canon 5D(I know its' F4....) I expect to be able to shoot in low light @ slow shutter speeds while keeping the ability to take profit of the IQ @ isos like 640-1000... Being forced to use iso 1600- 3200 all the time meanwhile wide open, should not be the meaning of a modern and very expensive zoom. D700's built in flash does not offer a solution because due to the 24-70's imposing size, it produces a very nasty lens shade which makes this lens unusuable with the PUFlash under 42mm...
Why Nikon makes their relative inexpensive zooms(16-85VR,18-200VR...) all with VR and their top class zooms without VR (17-55 for DX and 24-70 for FX). I am aware that the Canon 24-70F2.8 doesn't have IF neither... Why??? I would consider that a 24-70mm focal range doesn't "need" zoom as nonsense, while VR is ALWAYS helpfull @ slow shutter speeds...
I'm sure I will like this lens very much with available light or in near to studio setups, but for occasional indoor, eventuelly without flash, I prefer my tamron 28-300VC which has an incredible stabilisation, eventhough only F3.5-F4.5 in that focal range or the 24-120VR eventhough it's uncomparable about sharpness...
This is no critisism, 24-70AF-S is a very good lens, just -and TMHO- "24-70 F2.8 AF-S VR" and all this in a smaller packaging if that would be possible would be really perfect...

[photoforfun]

After about a week of evaluation I returned my 24-70 and tried a 24-85 F3.5-5.6 for a while. The results about sharpness with this little, light and compact lens were simply amazing. Even wide open it's about as sharp as the 24-70F2.8, but... terrible distortion over the whole focal range.(Underneath a distortion sample with the 24-85)

After all I bought a second hand 28-70 F2.8 and I'm very happy with this choise. The built quality exceeds the 24-70 F2.8, the AF is as fast, about sharpness the difference is marginal and I don't have the lens shade while using the D700 flash from 31mm upwards...

[janisbg]

Think I have participated in similar discussions at forums.dpreview.com but will repeat once more my established opinion:
VR in this lens is welcomed option but I can live without it in this focal range. If you use it for relatively static pics tripod is a must-have. If you use it for relatively dynamic pics then shutter speed is needed fast enough to "freeze" the motion. 1/60 sec or faster is recommended. If so short shutter speed is used you must be able to handhold even on 70 mm.
I remember my first experience with D2X after successful using of D70. Pictures were unsharp in alarming rate! I figured out quickly my handholding was no more good for increased pixel density. Then I worked to improve my handholding techniques and I got pretty sharp pics again.
D3/D700 sensors have the same pixel count as D2X but larger area so the pixel density is lower. It means FX cameras is more forgiving in handholding. Maybe things will be different again with D3X but if cropped pic will have around 10 mp than it should not be more tricky than D2X.

[JeffMorris]

Hello Stany,

I am suprised by the number of people that are "Upset" by the fact the 24-70 does not have VR. Under normal circumstances we never had Pro lenses with VR at short focal lengths. Consumer lenses ended up with VR because they were already starting off at a disadvantage with max apertures of f5.6 or in some cases higher with 3rd party lenses.

When I received my 24-70 lens one of the first things I noticed was a lack of VR. However with a maximum focal length of 70mm I feel it would not be justified if it ment the weight of the lens would increase.

As far as the "Distortion" with your 24-85g, that is not distortion in your shot. It is perspective caused by tilting your lens up when shooting the building. Try aiming your lens so that it is parallel to the ground. (Sometimes this does not work because you cut off the top of your subject) Get up a little higher, climb up on something. This is where a Perspective Control lens comes in handy.

Regards,

Jeff Morris

[pam.meier]

Seems like a lot of people think _all_ lenses should have VR.
You would always have the option to switch it off, but I read somewhere that VR would be very hard if not impossible to implement in this lens.

It´s my favorite normal lens ...

[Guy Van Hooveld]

I can live without VR in that lens, but I would be happy if there was a VR version. This gives extra flexibility for handheld night shooting, combined with the high ISO performance of the D700/D3. The optical quality is really impressive and it is my favorite "basic" lens on the D3. I also own a Tamron 28-75 2.8, and that is my favorite light lens, much lighter and more compact than the Nikkor, an ideal travel companion. Optically speaking they are similar, the Tamron is really a fantastic performer, only the AF is a bit of a problem (no built in motor) compared to the Nikkor.