|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on November 25, 2021 Pros: Sharpness, Colors, excellent quality Cons: Zoom chiera, weight Opinion: Really very sharp lens even at 2.8 I made some fantastic close-ups. I bought the 24-70 Without VR because I think that such a sharp lens already at 2.8 so bright does not need stabilization, because the shutter speeds will always remain relatively high, in fact I did not regret the purchase. The zoom chiera is very delicate, you have to treat it with care, but nothing serious. The only thing that in my opinion can be a problem on certain occasions and the weight, in fact I do not consider it a travel lens. But in portraiture, landscaping, even in night photos I consider it excellent. absolutely recommended! |
  | sent on May 09, 2021 Pros: Colors, sharpness,af Cons: construction Opinion: Very sharp lens with beautiful colors. Good blurry. Vignetting and distortion in the norm for the lens type, easily corrected in post production anyway. Flares and ghosts very well controlled. One thing I don't like is zoom motion, maximum extension to 24 mm and minimum to 50 mm.Unfortunately as others have said before it suffers from construction problems. I bought one used in the store and had to return it the next day as the focus ring that at the time did not seem to present any particular problems once we got home and took about twenty test shots began to become hard and almost unusable. Returned with another specimen equal to the new one. Too bad about this construction problem because the lens is of exceptional optical quality. |
| sent on April 15, 2021 Pros: overall quality, AF speed Cons: flare, weight/size, quality reduction at the edges, zoom ring that has hardened over time, LACK OF VR Opinion: Excellent optics in general. With machines like the D800 you start to notice the weight of the years, especially moving towards the edges of the image. In general, the exterior construction is excellent and robust, and the overall look of the image is more than great. As written in the cons, it suffers flare, weight and size are far from contained and in recent periods the zoom ring has hardened (a problem that seems to be present on this model). |
 | sent on October 05, 2020 Pros: Sharpness, colors, AF Cons: Weight Opinion: After years of using Fujifilm for total use, I took this aim from my father's kit since he was undoing it. I attached it to my D610 that I had not yet sold and I was impressed by the optical quality. I can't find a real flaw. Maybe the only thing I don't like is the intrusive flare in the backlight photos even without having the sun directly in the frame. The vividness of the colors is magnificent and very natural. You have to pay a little attention to 24mm if you have architectural components in the image I have the impression that it distorts a bit but clearly it is not a defect since it is not born for that. The moral is that now I can't help it in the exits and after years of light outings with Fuji I put the big backpack on my shoulders to carry this jewel, as long as my shoulders hold. Although The 16-55 Fuji is an accelerating lens, this nikon lens in my opinion on a full frame sensor does a little bit more that makes me prefer in general for travel photos or reportage. Going home and looking at the photos taken with this optics is really a pleasure. On the wide angular side I'll like the 20mm f1.8 (even he hadn't had the courage to sell it yet) to have more field and for all those cases where the photos need strictly straight lines |
 | sent on September 26, 2020 Pros: Versatility, brilliance, colors Cons: Lack of VR Opinion: My favorite goal, I always carry it with me in every photo release and never cheats. I do everything from landscapes (some distortion at 24mm, but nothing tragic) to portraits at 70mm (despite also possessing the 70-200 2.8 VRII), which give so much satisfaction with a nice incisiveness and an excellent blur. Mounted on an d810, in your hands it conveys an excellent feeling with a well-balanced weight. Only flaw, the lack of VR, but to be honest I have no intention of moving on to the next model! |
 | sent on March 09, 2020 Pros: Sharpness to all openings, af, general yield, blurry, colors (if they depend on the lens) Cons: Weight and clutter (but are in line with the competition), dials that harden at the first bump. Opinion: Possessed twice after years, exceptional optics, sharpness that I struggle to find in other zooms, I do not know who says that it is not sharp at the edges maybe should show it to a service center because my two owned at 2.8 had definitely edges and corners vouchers that closing became great (if anyone has any doubts I can safely send him some nef). I used it mainly to photograph people, and then a little bit of everything. For people (and children) I used it at f2.8 at all focal points, I never had anything to complain about, indeed, it had an exceptional yield and gave a three-dimensionality even if "only" 2.8 that I liked to die for. In the long exposures for some landscape at 24 was crisp all over the frame. Then I sold everything to have the eye af of the sony house but , lightness aside, I have to say that once I got to know it with d750 almost did not miss a shot and still guaranteed excellent results and when the a7iii struggles with the eye af for poor lighting , he (with d750) did not make a crease. Once you buy it in conditions ok without decentral dull or yield problems at the edges this is the ultimate all-rounder optics that you keep until fields, unless you buy bodies with many mpx then I do not know what to say but on the 24 of the d750 it simply made me delighted especially for the sharpness. The vignette is there but I'm never interested because in nikon you recover it without problems, even if you pushed the exposure, without ruining the image. If it weighs too much it is not his fault, a decently built 24 70 2.8 can't weigh 200 grams and in fact there are simply no 24 70 70 2.8 zooms built well for FF that weigh little. In conclusion, I say that like all cameras the lenses must be tested and used to make "real" photos and not mental pippe, only so you really appreciate every single component for its characteristics and quality, if you buy it in this perspective this zoom will not disappoint you as it has never disappointed any photographer who is not of Sunday, but who uses it to take photos, if instead you want to buy it for boredom leave it alone. If you want to buy it with the hope of being able to make spectacular photos then you will be disappointed like so many others because this zoom does not work wonders take photos for you, in this case better a nice photography course. I forgot, with 20 euros I replaced the tyres of the second model because they bought used and were a bit hardened, but it depends mainly on the sweating type of those who use it because every lens I bought new and held for 15 years has never had any problem tyres. I read that to many they loosen but even then, with 20 euros about the new original buys and change in a minute. |
 | sent on May 07, 2019 Pros: Excellent quality in the center, bright colors, excellent maneuverability. Cons: Bad edges on 30 mega sensors up, weight and footprint. Opinion: I don't know how to say it's a vision without flaws. The edges at almost all focal lengths are very scarce. You have to diaphragm at least 8 to have decent results, but then, as you ask for the review of Chausseur D'images (the only honest), why buy a 2.8? A 24 for landscape is almost unusable. Just print already at 30x40 to notice the difference in quality between center and edges. It's a reportage perspective, where you don't have to be too careful with the edges. It still makes it better in medium and long distances rather than at minimum. After 10 years, bought the D850, and saw how it went I replaced it with fixed. If you have to use a handyman zoom at closed diaphragms on 24/85, it behaves very well and costs 350 euros used (see Tom Hogan). From 5.6 onwards it goes slightly worse than 24/70, but only slightly. |
 | sent on May 07, 2019 Pros: sharpness, colors, brightness, ideal focal range. Cons: External tires, they say "the price" Opinion: I bought one to replace a 28-70 AFS 2.8, an exceptional optics but which lacked the step at the bottom towards 24 mm. I used it for 4 years on D700 but then sold it to try other brands. After a fairly intense use, the external coating tires were dull, I think they are very sensitive to hand sweat and natural heat. Today after 5 years that I have remade a kit Nikon, because the first love never forget, I bought it again. My copy still has 4 months to live so I don't know if in the meantime mum Nikon has changed the quality of the rubber coatings, only time will tell me. For the rest I preferred this version not stabilized either because I knew her for a long time and in fact of reliability gave me security and because of the stabilized version in many argue is not really sharper than this version. |
 | sent on October 09, 2018 Pros: Good optical quality, fast and responsive autofocus, excellent for professional use Cons: Building from "let me replace every year" Opinion: What about, a great lens as far as optical quality is concerned. You certainly do not do the landscapes at 24mm, but it was not born for This. Unfortunately the quality of construction compared to a 28-70 is ridiculous, and every year you will replace the tires at the service Center. Too bad that Nikon has lost the urge to produce granite optics, and to make lenses "belline to behold", has sacrificed so much Durability. If you take a 28-70, this in comparison will seem like a toy. In summary it is a nice lens, excellent for professionals, but consider that every year will take a stroll from the Photoriparatore. Then if you want to go for weddings with the equipment that seems to have made a war... |
 | sent on October 03, 2018 Pros: Build quality, first-rate lenses Cons: Too bulky and heavy. Price Opinion: I bought this lens several years ago, and since then I've never stopped using this kind of optics. To put it all previously I had the 28-70 f/2.8 But on the most beautiful of a photo shoot once mounted the AF of the 28-70 misfires, forcing me to fall back on an old 35-70 f/2.8 owe by a colleague, for me was a real nightmare. Anyway returning to the 24-70 in my opinion is a great lens that I think I could not help it, I think it is one of the most beautiful built so far by Nikon. Lately I'm going to buy the most modern version, I'm evaluating the thing. The price buying it new was high, but given the use that you can make the quality you pay. |
 | sent on March 04, 2018 Pros: A classic that never betrays Cons: Weight, 24mm distortion, VR absence Opinion: This lens is perpetually attached to one of my cameras, and has given me hundreds of great shots. rnThe sharpness is good, the autofocus is fast, and it holds the dense sensors well. However, for the latest models (type D850) perhaps the new model equipped with VR is more suitable ... rnrnNon can be said to be a masterpiece of lens in an absolute sense, but at the bottom is a standard zoom 2.8 that tries to stay relatively compact and balanced on the body PRO and semi pro.rnTo make me understand better, I add that I bought the 24-120 f4 VR hoping to do without the 24-70, being able to count on a greater focal excursion, and in general of so much practicality in più.rnAfter a month it was already on sale because it lacked the engraving to which the "old" 24-70 had accustomed me! rnrnGood light to everyone! |
user58495  | sent on February 08, 2018 Pros: ALL Cons: ANYTHING Opinion: Worth up to the last penny of what it costs ... rnNot say it is fully considered one of the best PRO lenses ever produced by Nikon. Excellent color rendering, excellent resistance to flare and excellent and constant optical performance at all focal lengths with only a slight loss of around 50/70 mm. Diaframmandolo a little 'recovers to the grande.rnC'è those who complain about the weight but would have liked to metal because it looks plasticoso ... rnWould he weigh if it were made of metal? 3Kg? RnPlastic or better alloys and used compounds serve just to limit the weight, but who buys it should know well what goes to meet.rnBokeh very good, but I read who complains about the yield and detail at full aperture or use on bodies with many pixels ... rnWhat you want tell you ... the mother of eternal discontent is unfortunately always pregnant ...! rn Again I urge to look at the galleries of this perspective: extraordinary and amazing ... They speak for themselves, in the face of the owls.rnBrava Nikon! |
 | sent on January 09, 2018 Pros: The word itself says ..... "PRO" sharpness, colors very close to reality but always depends on how the body is set (!!!) good even without the VR, I do not need because I still do not have the dance of San Vito and then there are the tripod, autofocus without problems ..... price if you find it used. Cons: Those who complain of weight and size do not take it there are alternatives plasticoni. Opinion: Before giving my personal opinion on this goal I wanted to try it for a few months ..... well, I struggled to the first shots to "understand" this glass but in the end we got confident and now we go of love and d ' agreement. I really like the colors and the sharpness that makes me even the TA AF I find it sufficiently reactive even with poor light on the Nikon D610 I can imagine on better bodies .... I do not understand who defines it as a "palsticone" or complains about weight, or have not understood or demand more, which in my opinion becomes difficult, I made several shots with this lens and honestly I did not find any defects. Resign yourself to pay the price of the weight if you want optics of level otherwise renounced to the quality. I shot at ISO 6400 during a show at the circus with this little gem and in that case he "started" to lose something but just below gave me extremely good files. As soon as possible I will post some pictures ....... finally my judgment is "accattavevillo".rnAGGIORNAMENTO .... passed to the Nikon D750 I had the pleasant surprise that with this body makes it even better, especially at high ISO I am amazed at the yield, in essence I think I will never sell it. |
  | sent on October 27, 2017 Pros: Very sharp, fast af, well constructed, great hood. Cons: Like all the zoom is slightly less sharp at the edges. Opinion: I leave this consideration. Already from the camera display after taking a picture, you see that it has a high sharpness, and the same feeling I had when I first shot with my fantastic 300 f 2.8 VRII. Obviously there are two different optics in all and all but they return both good contrast colors and sharpness. I am saying that I am 28 years old and I have a minimum of experience. I am convinced that those who preceded me in his review bring his personal experience, and I have no reason to doubt what he said, perhaps his specimen was not good, but the specimen in my possession is really great. The construction is solid and the weight for me is definitely not a problem as it gives some stability in the recovery phase, which I prefer. I use it mainly with the D610 but I do not deny the use even with the D800, although I prefer the fixed optics in my possession. I highly recommend it, maybe to buy it as good used (my virtually indistinguishableand from the new). |
 | sent on September 30, 2017 Pros: Good yield, versatility, professional lens Cons: Mechanical delicacy Opinion: Slow a little overrated, owes its luck to the fact that it is considered part of the triad. If they had put it on the list at 1000 euros it would have also deserved a nice vote, say a 9. But it's certainly not phenomenal, without going far just compare it - optically and mechanically - to the old 28-70 f 2.8 to get hurt. The 24-70 has from its, if nothing else, that the af works and does not die suddenly, but the general construction is indeed modest, just a bottarella to find yourself with one of the hardened di swallows. The sharpness, especially in the middle, is very good for what is needed (this is, or at least should be, a work optics) but certainly those who seek the maximum of sharpness from a 36 or more mpxl must look elsewhere. In the field Nikon remains indispensable cmq for ceremonials, events and whatnot also because the new 24-70 VR, in addition to being a plastic, is also inferior optically. The cost is finally disproportionate, just take this and at the same time the 70-200 VR2 to understand that the latter definitely plays in another league. In short, for me this is the optics to do ceremonies or reports not too hard. I read that almost all the users who bought it release rave reviews but that does not take away my sleep, in my opinion they are unproven or have never tried really level lenses... |
 | sent on September 26, 2017 Pros: Sharpness also surprising at TA throughout the frame, pleasantly saturated and contrasted colors, excellent bokeh, metal construction, intrinsic value of the optics. Perfect for 12/16 Mpix sensors. Cons: Weight, encumbrance even with folded hood, apparent fragility despite the construction. Opinion: I'm always extremely critical and bad in judgments, but this time I applaud Nikon. Taken used at a great price giving away my very disappointing 16-35 f4 (what is ridiculous as yield and construction for what it costs). Just mounted on D3s and D700 .... WOW !!! Great sharpness even at the edges at TA. On the 12 Mpix is ??a view of a higher level. I do not know how to behave with the most dense and modern sensors. Some say that about 36 and more Mpix is ??not great ... I do not doubt, but should not be unbalanced with stupid statements to those who, despite having Pro lenses, remain enthusiastic about this lens. Given the brightness and focal lengths, the lack of stabilization is not felt too much. My shopkeeper advised me this instead of the more modern VR, even at the cost of forgetting a much greater gain (textual words: "If you need the VR then take it, in fact, wait for the Tamron G2 or test the Sigma and save a nice little ... but I personally suggest you the old man who, on your car bodies, goes very muchbetter than the new and maybe even the others! ") The weight makes you feel but is well balanced on bodies pro and / or BG.The construction is excellent but, perhaps because influenced by various reviews that signaled its fragility, I the terror of mistreating it.The hood makes it an even more voluminous lens than it is, exasperating its length when mounted and the width when folded.Tried both the Tamron (the G1, but the G2 seems to make it the same, at least in the compartment ' sharpness') that the Sigma (I already have the 24 and 35 ART ... really good!) but they did not convince me, so I highly recommended to those who want to stay in the brand and do not want to risk with third-party goals, even if stabilized and more modern, given that the overall yield is absolutely not less (on the contrary) and that over time maintains a greater value in the used. |
 | sent on September 09, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, AF, building, everything. Cons: Nothing Opinion: I have used this lens for many years with great satisfaction and under all conditions and I can only say that it is the only lens I regretted to have sold shortly before going to the VR version of Nikon always obviously. rn I can not yet evaluate the new 24-70 vr since I have it in a few days but I do not see all this difference.rnBut I can say that there are no other lenses of this quality with the same focus, I do not understand the previous review, I also made a serious comparison with the latest Sigma and the latter did not convince me even though it looks like a great product. |
 | sent on June 19, 2017 Pros: Good average diaphragm yield Cons: Poor open diaphragm open, RIDICOLA construction, heavy and bulky, absolutely worse than 70-200 2.8 VR II Opinion: Good goal, nothing amazing, which is definitely not what it costs. Constructively worse than an 18-55, when still under warranty the brace hinges and assistance says it has fallen when it is not confirmed by perfect aesthetics. Restored at my own expense has hardened again and the technician says that you just have to put it firmly on a table for this to happen. So I doubt the utility of tropicalization in such a fragile object. Absolutely disenchanted, nothing like that rendered and very heavy and too large for what it offers. Certainly never the official guarantee and I will probably go to Sigma who has always satisfied me. Voting 5. |
| sent on April 21, 2017 Pros: Construction, aesthetics, optical performance and ease of use. Cons: Nobody. Opinion: Aesthetically beautiful, very comfortable in my opinion, and with a quality ottima.rnMolto versatile and well-balanced with bodies as d810, on df tends to be unbalanced in avanti.rnTrovo very nice the hood, I find it visually beautiful, I contrasted the right and very nitido.rnA my higher alert also to the modern version of the VR qualse not feel the esigenza.rnA my opinion the best that you can take and 24-70 of the used market are many occasions. |
 | sent on January 02, 2017 Pros: Versatility, quality to be a zoom, MAF speed. Cons: For my taste a bit too contrasty and saturated. Extrinsic frailties, barrel a bit long especially with hood. Opinion: A real workhorse. versatile and light optical good quality to be a zoom. The MAF speed is excellent. Guarantees to bring home the risultato.rnColori series G (alas), which contrasted and saturated with shadows often more closed than necessary .... Nikon where are you going? RnUtilizzabile without a 2.8.rnLa construction problems is good but extrinsically fragile, the barrel length requires further attention quandornci moves in tight areas and affollati.rnLa use and conceive it as a working perspective for events and weddings and for me, in this respect, it is ottima.rnPer everything else there are fixed. rnrnrnrn |
 | sent on October 26, 2016 Pros: sublime picture quality, robustness, versatility Cons: distortion at 24mm, lens hood a bit 'cumbersome and delicate Opinion: This lens I will not change anything, do not think the VR I could be of interest on a perspective of this kind, only more at risk of breaking components in time .... rnRisponde well in every situaizone light, contrato and complexity of use. rnObiettivo which is a guarantee, excellent bokeh, fire fast, quiet. And 'particularly robust, and weight, appreciable, is well manageable in view of the construction quality offering. It 's always in my backpack. |
 | sent on July 26, 2016 Pros: Sharpness af remote speed focus Cons: Some may seem cumbersome but you have focal lengths from 24 to 70mm and 2.8! The weight also challenging but the quality of the materials used is exceptional Opinion: The goal appears solid is built as it should be! Weight is the size is a compromise because you can not have everything! I have sold my trusty fixed (35mm f2 d. 50mm 1.4 d. 85mm 1.8 d) and I took the 24-70mm only a matter of versatility but I must say that it is really neat to 2.8 (I use it on d700)! The speed of 'af is impressive is also the defocused very nice and mellow! Some people complain of excessively saturated colors might not faithful instead I I took years af-d objectives have not noticed catastrophic tonal variations indeed! There recently lho to express a more thorough review, but given the prices of new and nn I can do is advise |
 | sent on July 07, 2016 Pros: good construction, fast and precise M.AF, very true color, size and weight accettabili- Cons: Hood plasticky and cumbersome. Opinion: I got used yesterday morning, in perfect condition and little used. It 'a marvel, an object that once mounted in the car hardly want to change it. Maximum yield to TA even at the edges. Without the lens hood, it is not bulky. The weight is there but it is far from conditioning. The lack of stability is felt. Purchase strongly suggest that it is a well-paid monetary sacrifice by the results. |
 | sent on February 01, 2016 Pros: Zoom all do. Excellent qualities. Cons: Nothing only the hood cumbersome. Opinion: Personally I consider it a great lens and professional. I use it along with the 14-24 and the 24-70 f2.8 f2.8 bright. making quick, precise focusing. At first I was tempted to switch to the new VR version but have been discouraged. The only problem that gives me is a central area of ??the circular frame overexposed with shooting with IR72 infrared filter. I was told that the phenomenon is called hot spot but not all specimens do. In fact I'd like to know if someone happened the same thing. |
| sent on January 26, 2016 Pros: A little round and a little nothing Cons: nothing good or bad Opinion: The yield is excellent, perhaps the best nikon zoom I've ever had and tried .. if you work in photography is guaranteed to return much of the expense. However I found it neither fish nor fowl. I used it for reportage, a couple of weddings and baptisms of friends and children of friends. Very nice pictures but I was limited .. too short for good pictures, too long for landscapes. I changed with a 35mm, which has the same "defect" to the focal length. However, for a weight and a smaller footprint, a higher quality and brightness that make the lens less monotonous and more versatile. I did not have great feeling with him, even if you can not admit that its quality is excellent |
| sent on January 20, 2016 Pros: very sharp in the center at all focal lengths even at RT. Also perfect edges to small apertures to f8. Very well built. Saturated colors and beautiful tan for a zoom Cons: TA at the edges are not the best especially 24, it weighs and is cumbersome. You do not pass unnoticed Opinion: And 'one of the objectives I use the most, is not perfect but it is well done and for reportage and portraits is great (except for the space) and I do not regret a drive. Ben diaphragmed says its also in the landscape and is very fast in focus even in low light conditions. on the canvas does very well in portraits boasting a blur really nice unlike other Canon and Tamron 24-70 |
 | sent on October 21, 2015 Pros: Sharpness good, fast and accurate AF, blurred interesting, punchy colors. Cons: High price, poor build quality to price, heavy, cumbersome. Opinion: I use it for a year (paid, again, Nikon, a folly). And 'undoubtedly an object professional work, no frills, that never leaves you on foot. For what it costs him want more robust, but otherwise is fine. I do not share the opinion of those who make it a myth (the magical triad!): A zoom, heck !, and a compromise (to have the highest quality we want fixed!); but honestly does his job (landlines Sigma Art, instead, while optically sensational, they do almost never saw their AF dancer - just to give an example). For my fleet (D40, D200, D700, D700, Df) do not feel the need to zoom the sharpest photographs and X-rays do. Used for what should be used (no landscape, there it takes the sharpness of a fixed; nothing architecture, there it takes the low distortion of a drive), or in the reportage, the street (not for photographers timid, though), is perfect. |
 | sent on September 18, 2015 Pros: construction, made from f5.6, afs Cons: from a perspective of this level it is expected the maximum Opinion: Taken x replace the Tamron 24-70 Vr, I used both on D7100 that of d700. It has a good yield from f2.8 to f4, good from f5.6 to f 11.rnSe compared to Tamron has an excellent construction and a fast afs, but as made there a lot of difference. The lack of vr on Fx is not felt, on the other hand is Right. For a lens of this level and of this price you expect the maximum already 'full aperture, where instead it has a good yield through the middle. The colors are a bit more 'saturated and contrasting, typical of these obiettivi.rnIn conclusion, if you do not try af professional performance and a high level of body you can' safely choose the Tamron, quality 'optical and' almost 'identica.rnIl price, and 'certainly high, but in used are good choices. |
 | sent on July 03, 2015 Pros: AF, made on the whole range of focal construction. Cons: Weight Opinion: Taken to replace the 28/70 AFS; the use of D700 and D750, and has made, in my opinion, good delivery across the entire focal lengths. Does not suffer from front / back focus unlike 28/70, more contrasted than its predecessor but not at levels of 14/24. If purchased used, in a fair price, I think it's an excellent investment. |
 | sent on June 02, 2015 Pros: Sharpness from f4, focal range, yield Lit, AF, Ergonomics Cons: Sharpness at 24mm, f2.8 and Sharpness to the edges in general, construction, Price Opinion: A lens that I loved and that I preferred his grandfather, the 28-70 2.8. Has a great autofocus and treatment to nanocrystals does his job in the backlight where there is a clear difference from the past; the yield in the center by f4 is great, while also having the edges to a level of acceptable sharpness for this class of objectives have to diaphragm up to f8 (and is to be taken into account in landscaping). It 'very convenient to use, it holds well, but as usual, the quality is a step below than before, and it's strange because the 14-24 who came out with him is built much better. In addition to the extreme edges of 24mm are very degraded and barrel distortion really accentuated. Do not forget that it is a project of 8 years old and that the equivalent Canon LII solves a lot better throughout the frame. It needs an upgrade and still costs too much for what it offers. Rumors suggest that may come out within a year version PF VR: I look forward to! |
 | sent on April 14, 2015 Pros: 2.8, sharpness, well built, AF Cons: footprint with hood grafted on the contrary Opinion: I own this lens for a year and a half since the first use always find it excellent. Coupled to the D750, with which it balances very well, is a fairy tale, the af is excellent, fast and accurate in all situations. Already in 2.8 is very sharp but closing one stop you have exceptional result. I really like the build quality, his sound and I do not consider the weight of the problem. Its neo for me is in the hood, it is true that protects the front lens in the entire zoom range, but in rest position considerably increases the volume of the lens; I would have preferred (although I do not know whether it is feasible as a project) the internal movement style 70-200 2.8. |
 | sent on March 26, 2015 Pros: solid, crisp in almost all focal lengths and with a fast f Cons: the short focal loses a bit 'of sharpness at RT. hood very cumbersome that does not pass unnoticed in street. Opinion: it was my first lens of high-end and for about two months I never detached from d5100. Then are passed to the d810 and the satisfactions were not able to grow. On FF fact is super versatile. The ideal to carry around if you do not want too many goals in the backpack. It 'a pleasure to use. Its size (especially the hood) make it very exposed to the eyes of passers-by, maybe this is the only thing that annoys me. However, it is a must for those looking for a certain quality |
 | sent on March 26, 2015 Pros: sharpness. luster. well built. Cons: no one. a lens professionale..deve have its weight. Opinion: coming from a splendid 28.70 .2,8. pity that, the engine is broken. a defect of this goal. I opted for the new 24.70 2.8. the natural continuation of 28.70. free from the problem of the engine. a superb lens .. try to shoot a roll of velvia ... you will remain speechless. a lens that can not miss in the kit of a amateur photographer |
 | sent on March 01, 2015 Pros: Very precise and quiet the af. Image sharpness and colors ok, I think is the top of the goals that I had Cons: perhaps for a slightly heavy f2.8 24/70 Opinion: And 'constructed with a precision and accuracy really rare. Great lens talking to the camera and it's from you (nikon d600). I'm really glad to have spent "many pennies" for a dream come true. If I can find a negativity perhaps again maybe it's weight but compared to other optical 2.8 being narrower in diameter and longer you hold better. |
| sent on January 05, 2015 Pros: Really professional, construction, solidity 'and priceless definition and quality' image (with D800) rnAutofocus lightning Cons: I paid 1,700 eu, not a little, but we talk about a lens fairytale Opinion: Acquisttato about 36 months ago, original and well NitalrnSolido challenged, becomes a constant companion in the picture "average", given the focale.rnOttima definition and quality 'image, from professional optical e'.rnDifficilissimo which use semi professional to find fault; fast and precise in the autofocus.rnAnche crop exasperated with the sensor of the D800 fairytale not find defects, rnHo tried to do it again with an old Sigma 17:35 2.8 / 4 anna ago ........ unwatchable images (sensor from fear) .rnOttima distortion and chromatic basale.rnDa have absolutely. A must. With professional bodies to the maximum. |
 | sent on December 23, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, contrast, brightness, precision, low noise Cons: I do not know Opinion: Quality lens which lends itself to be used in many situations. Sharpness impressive even at full aperture with details incredibly defined. Personally I find it hard to find fault with this lens but just wanting to find one I could say that clutter with lens hood can sometimes be excessive but I think this is an insignificant detail. Currently it is the best lens of my kit and I think it would be the only one that wouldnt eyes closed. As for the cost, well, 'we say that's not really donated but compared to what it offers I think the value is well balanced. I never sntito lack of VR. |
 | sent on December 22, 2014 Pros: Build quality, great to TA 2.8, colors and fast AF and quiet! Cons: The weight (if you can call against), a little 'cumbersome especially with the lens hood. Opinion: It 's my Christmas gift (in advance) taken November 30 ... honestly had fought for days whether to take the Nikon or its rival Tamron ... eventually checked the Nikon ... and am I glad I made this choice. Excellent from all points of view, coupled with my D800 is almost touching! They come out images full of detail and crisp, a TA is great but in the corners loses narrowly defined but if you close already have a couple of stop is a blade. Building material excelled (by security). Weighs almost 1kg (not a featherweight) and is as long as zoom especially with the lens hood attached, it is not easy to take pictures stolen (without being seen). Many noted the lack of VR but I I miss it for several reasons (already weighs much think with VR, is not cheap and I imagine that he would rise again stabilizer) rn |
 | sent on September 02, 2014 Pros: overall optical quality and very well-kept building Cons: weight and dimensions Opinion: optics that covers most of the requirements, including professional, always responding with great quality, in particular the intermediate diaphragms. (From f: 4.5 to f: 9). It bears also a decent backlight. It is not, however, an objective comfortable to wear "walking", given the very high weight and bulk is not indifferent. In particular, it is, in my opinion, too long and interacts badly, squilibrandoli, with smaller bodies fx (df, d600, 610 d); but it is sufficient to take note and act accordingly. |
 | sent on August 19, 2014 Pros: colors, fast AF, sharpness strength Cons: cumbersome, lack of VR Opinion: the thing that struck me was the weight, I thought it was heavier, but got used to the 70-200 lens is a "light" .rnmi was struck colors and nitidezza.rnl'unica thing missing is the VR, but not it's so grave.rnsulla DX is a bit 'long but the results are very happy with this purchase buoni.rnmolto |
| sent on July 30, 2014 Pros: build quality, sharpness, aperture, color rendering Cons: price of the new weight Opinion: It 'a lens that just does not come off the mountains more. I always carry it with me.rnE 'robust. clear even from F4 to F8 until the best. color rendering pazzesca.rnE 'heavy but it has a lot of "glass" on the inside and the barrel is "armored" .. in short, the quality of the new pagarnil price is expensive but as with all lenses if you buy used in good conditions you will save between 30% of these figures is that an amount notevole.rn |
 | sent on June 04, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, vivid colors, precise and fast AF, solid construction Cons: Weight (but the quality you have to feel) Opinion: Purchased recently, I'm using it all the time, because in my opinion, covers the most common focal already clear to F2, 8 although a little 'less at the edges, the sharpness increases by closing the diaphragm. Slight distortion to a minimum focal length (24 mm), but can be corrected with softwarernMolto delicate and beautiful sfuocatornSicuramente one of the best lenses Nikon home |
 | sent on February 26, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, image quality, color, construction, solid and protective sun visor (the best I've seen so far), it is a knife, a beautiful hard case (I did not expect). RNLA its opening in 2.8 is fantastic, images that seem to come "alive". rnsicuramente find out many, many more advantages over time. Cons: weight (weighs truly a bang)!, but the quality .. on the other hand, costs (half salary), nothing else. Opinion: It 's the last lens that I took and I am stra-stra happy, I thought and thought about it months before you buy ... rn-"I had to take this step or not" ... both for its size and cost full-bodied with hood becomes "a tele hunting .. hehe ..". The picture performance is so good that it seems not one zoom.rnVeramente with this lens, Nikon has made me a very proud owner of this brand, having also Canon, this acoppiata (D800 +24-70 F2.8) makes me you want to sell Canon.rnVeramente I'll be repetitive, but I am so happy with this lens (I had a fear of being disappointed), and instead are entusiastaaa! RNA who wants the best and is ready to pay the maximum recommend it, take it incredibile.rnNeanche is my fixed 1.4mi give a yield equal. |
 | sent on January 16, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, brightness, speed autofocus, construction Cons: Dimensions and weight Opinion: What to say about this Zoom Nikkor ... In my opinion a great lens (from a zoom I would not expect more than that) covers all focal lengths in my opinion the most widely used and maintains the constant f/2.8 maximum aperture. Good center already in TA, a little 'less you but closing edges a bit' the diaphragm becomes very clear. Certainly the quality and constant brightness you pay (and not only with the price), but also with the bulk and weight, especially with long and wide hood is attached. Council to use it on camera bodies suitable as a handle and weight or everything will be unbalanced (remember that the lens alone weighs almost 1 kilo). Surely a lens highly recommended. |
 | sent on August 18, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, colors, brightness, resistance to weathering. Cons: Dimensions with lens hood grafted on the contrary. Opinion: They have already written so much and I can quote just about everyone. The lens is sharp, fast, has great colors, is always reliable in terms of yield. The construction is more than enough for the type of use that I do (professional photographer but not a mason .. I never planted the nails). rnIl hood, when engaged in reverse to put the lens greatly increases the diameter and sometimes makes it difficult to fit into any backpack a bit smaller: in the lowepro flipside 400 AW I can not put the 70-200 and this with both barndoors because otherwise I squeeze the remaining space .. rnPer the rest, the best medium zoom Nikon. |
| sent on May 17, 2013 Pros: Image sharpness, versatility, speed and quiet autofocus, solid construction, tropicalization. Cons: Weight and dimensions do not really reduced, the rubber rings that after a while 'widens. Opinion: Purchased this lens more than 4 years ago, used to each use and always perfetti.rnOttimo results with both dx and fx, (although at first is a bit 'long) does not regret the fixed lenses, it is very nice and fuzzy makes the images in the foreground almost tridimensionali.rnLa lack of VR I never considerata.rnrnDa when I bought this objective, it is rarely removed from my car fotografica.rnrnUn optical handyman who is second to none. |
 | sent on March 13, 2013 Pros: protection against dust and water, fast and accurate AF, versatility and high quality optical medium and long focal Cons: mechanically less robust, optical quality poor on the periphery and especially at the edges at short focal lengths, geometric distortion at short focal high, high AC at short focal lengths, field curvature pronounced at short focal lengths. Opinion: C while it is not technically usable for photo quality of high-resolution cameras |
 | sent on October 18, 2012 Pros: Construction, fast AF, optical performance, colors Cons: Weight, lack VR Opinion: The optical excellence. So call this lens to those who seek an opinion. Sharpest already f2, 8 even at the edges, very fast in focus. Construction nothing short of excellent, made entirely of alloy magnesio.rnLa use as only lens for weddings and reportage. It offers superb colors. If the lens is a must have, call it even if we make a comparison of economic cost / prestazioni.rnSulla d700 is a show, never let you down! |
user10335 | sent on August 28, 2012 Pros: Sharpness, autofocus, ergonomics, construction and so on and so forth .... Cons: Weight. Opinion: on this point has been said very professional, crystal clear already at maximum aperture, focus almost pleasant to drive, and color consistency make it a lightning-fast autofocus zoom practically free from defects. On full frame is very versatile, a little less on DX. Actually is a bit 'pesantuccio, but it is a sign that it is not constructed of plastic. It 'a lens will not disappoint you in any case, to purchase without delay. |
 | sent on June 19, 2012 Pros: Professional lens in every respect. Excellent! Very fast and accurate AF. Sharpest! Cons: Heavy. Long. Opinion: Possessing a high-end DX (D300s) I had 10 thousand thoughts before deciding to buy this lens. I am absolutely impressed. It 's really good! And 'heavy and long, but it is also a professional lens, high quality and they are things that you pay. At the moment I have not encountered defects. From what I've been able to test these days is really great in every situation. He does not have VR, but it is better that way, it would have been even more heavy and bulky. A TA is fabulous. The excellent bokeh. Really recommended. |
 | sent on May 03, 2012 Pros: Build Quality, Quick AF, Sharpness, Cons: Size and weight (but you pay for), Lens hood "intrusive" Opinion: And 'one of the top range Nikon. The cost is rewarded with fantastic images. It has a slight distortion at 24mm but well corregibile PP. RNLA lens allows you to take pictures at events or interiors without flash. Exploitable for ritratti.rnPer regard to the weight sincermente I did not realize. I used it for 1 hour in the studio and about 2 hours outside and is sopportabilissimo.rnRitengo that the lack of VR does not feel too much anyway and would have increased the weight of the bag is lenternDa when I find it difficult to detach from the machine |
 | sent on November 11, 2011 Pros: Pro? PRO! In everything you everywhere already in TA is absolutely solid and rewarding tridimensionale.rnAssolutamente Cons: Pesa but there's more ... it's nice long, Suffers of d800 Opinion: After several tentannamenti DX and various thoughts I decided to buy this lens frustrated by the results obtained with lenses optically less performanti.rnNonostante the very high cost, size, extremely generous and substantial weight, this is 24-70 The Target to combine with any body "serious" .rnIndipendentemente by size, yield and usability of this lens are unique and represent the benchmark for quality Nikon.rnPosso assure you that the difference can be seen in any situation and the quality of the lens is definitely comparable to some first lenses.rnLa lack of VR is to be considered in this case an advantage in the sense of reducing the weight and footprint. Rarely used, being able to work with the fine lines of fire also TA.rnLo zoom is nice mellow and precise, and the fire is generous in size as you conviene.rnrnSu d800 suffers at the edges. And 'perspective to the ceremony and portrait why this matters relatively. In terms of contrast and quality is fine but if you want to use it for scenery or architecturecould be better, as the 16-35 f / 4. |
 | sent on September 28, 2011 Pros: Construction, optical performance, quiet and fast AF and versatility. Cons: Weight, size, lack VR, distortion at 24mm. Opinion: FF is a handyman of high quality, and not coincidentally is often a first choice of many Ceremonialists and beyond. Used on a reduced size, is usabilissimo the longer focal lengths, but often remains too long in the shorter ones. The AF is precise, fast and quiet. The collars are well sized and correctly "braking". Handle this glass, made of magnesium and tropical is a real pleasure. The presence of the VR would be a further evolutionary step, but I think that at the moment would increase the already significant weight excessively. Distorts to 24 mm, but this can always be corrected by software. Unexceptionable in optical performance just a little diaphragmed, defends himself very well at full aperture. With the hood grafted clutter is truly remarkable, but especially when the lens is mounted on the "flagship" is a collection handy and balanced (apart from the weight). The price is high, but the quality and robustness, with a view to use for and not limited to, certainly justify. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
