Nikon 24-70: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "{{photonavbar}} <div class="flex-row row"> <div class="col-xs-12 col-md-6 col-lg-6"> class=img-responsive </div> <div class="col-xs-12 col-md-6 col...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
[[Zooms]] in general are practical, they give you options for the [[focal length]], but they usually sacrifice in quality. This lens is [[aperture|fast]], and the quality over the range is excellent. The lens has a great reputation (rightfully so), this is also why, even used it costs quite a bit. | [[Zooms]] in general are practical, they give you options for the [[focal length]], but they usually sacrifice in quality. This lens is [[aperture|fast]], and the quality over the range is excellent. The lens has a great reputation (rightfully so), this is also why, even used it costs quite a bit. | ||
I do not like mid-range [[zooms]] a lot, let's face it. If you have a 24mm you do not need to have 35mm. Likewise if you have a 35mm you do not need a 50mm. And if you have a 50mm you do not need a 70mm and so on. Of course there is quite a difference between 24mm and 70mm. But this [[zoom]] is not really replacing a bag full of (really good) lenses, it is replacing more like two, and giving you the opportunity to be lazy when framing something in between | I do not like mid-range [[zooms]] a lot, let's face it. If you have a 24mm you do not need to have 35mm. Likewise if you have a 35mm you do not need a 50mm. And if you have a 50mm you do not need a 70mm and so on. Of course there is quite a difference between 24mm and 70mm. But this [[zoom]] is not really replacing a bag full of (really good) lenses, it is replacing more like two, and giving you the opportunity to be lazy when framing something in between. | ||
The 24mm is a very nice [[wide angle]], probably as much as anyone will ever need, but if I were to pick a longer second lens, it would be slightly longer than the 70mm, probably something in the 85 - 135mm range. Of course this is a matter of preference. | |||
I technically do not ''own'' this lens, it is part of a setup at my work, and since it is available this is more or less the main lens I use for everything at work, apart from a [[Nikon 105]] [[macro]] I need for the close ups. | |||
====Versions==== | ====Versions==== | ||
| Line 52: | Line 55: | ||
<div class="panel-heading">'''[[Full Frame]] '''</div> | <div class="panel-heading">'''[[Full Frame]] '''</div> | ||
<div class="panel-body"> | <div class="panel-body"> | ||
This is definitely a lens ''only'' for [[full frame]] cameras. | |||
This is a | |||
</div> | </div> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| Line 63: | Line 64: | ||
<div class="panel-heading">'''[[APS-C]] '''</div> | <div class="panel-heading">'''[[APS-C]] '''</div> | ||
<div class="panel-body"> | <div class="panel-body"> | ||
Technically this | Technically this would work on a [[APS-C]] body, but there is hardly any reason for using it. It would work like a 35mm-105mm zoom. Without the wider range, it would be quite limited and even the basic [[Nikon 18-105]] would be more practical for day to day use. The alternative for an [[APS-C]] would be the much much cheaper 18-55 which is also way lighter. At 200g the 18-55 is as light as any [[prime lens]] and also in the same price class, so it is harder to argue against it. | ||
[[ | |||
</div> | </div> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| Line 116: | Line 116: | ||
[[Category:Lenses]] | [[Category:Lenses]] | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:Zoom]] | ||
[[Category:Nikon]] | [[Category:Nikon]] | ||
{{Photodisclaimer}} | {{Photodisclaimer}} | ||
Revision as of 09:23, 23 December 2020
This lens is one of the reasons why I am writing these pages. This is a beautiful lens, no question about it. However, it is also very heavy, expensive and for most people frankly quite unnecessary especially for amateur photographers.
Zooms in general are practical, they give you options for the focal length, but they usually sacrifice in quality. This lens is fast, and the quality over the range is excellent. The lens has a great reputation (rightfully so), this is also why, even used it costs quite a bit.
I do not like mid-range zooms a lot, let's face it. If you have a 24mm you do not need to have 35mm. Likewise if you have a 35mm you do not need a 50mm. And if you have a 50mm you do not need a 70mm and so on. Of course there is quite a difference between 24mm and 70mm. But this zoom is not really replacing a bag full of (really good) lenses, it is replacing more like two, and giving you the opportunity to be lazy when framing something in between.
The 24mm is a very nice wide angle, probably as much as anyone will ever need, but if I were to pick a longer second lens, it would be slightly longer than the 70mm, probably something in the 85 - 135mm range. Of course this is a matter of preference.
I technically do not own this lens, it is part of a setup at my work, and since it is available this is more or less the main lens I use for everything at work, apart from a Nikon 105 macro I need for the close ups.
Versions
- The picture is the older f/2.8 ED version
- There is a newer f/2.8 VR version with vibration reduction. A bit more pricey.
| Price | Very expensive |
|---|---|
| Weight | Heavy, 900g |
| Good for | Indoors, people, landscape |
| New or used | New is about 1500, used you can get it around 1000, I would not buy this, but if you do, go for the new one. |
This is definitely a lens only for full frame cameras.
Technically this would work on a APS-C body, but there is hardly any reason for using it. It would work like a 35mm-105mm zoom. Without the wider range, it would be quite limited and even the basic Nikon 18-105 would be more practical for day to day use. The alternative for an APS-C would be the much much cheaper 18-55 which is also way lighter. At 200g the 18-55 is as light as any prime lens and also in the same price class, so it is harder to argue against it.
Why to use Prime Lenses an example
Here I compare the Nikon 24/f2.8 with one of the nicest Zooms you will find, the Nikon 24-70. Both lenses are f/2.8. Of course the Zoom gives you more flexibility. But look at the size of that thing. The Zoom lens is about 1 kg, 4x heavier, and costs at least 3x if not more when new. Since the Nikon 24-70 is so popular, even used versions sell for close to 1000, you can buy an entire arsenal of equipment for that money as explain here.
Gallery
The lens on a full frame camera
24mm on a full frame
24mm on APS-C this is effectively 35mm
These pages are for Amateur Photographers and not really for seasoned photographers and professionals. I have no affiliation or commercial interest with any brand/make. I write from my own experience. I ended up using mainly Nikon, so I am more familiar with this brand than others. See price for notes on pricing as well as photography related links.