|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on July 25, 2019 Pros: ... What about... has an extra gear. Cons: It's huge, heavy but it gives you an exhilarating feeling in your hands Opinion: Purchased to have a lens brighter than 4 with an indisputable quality. It seems impossible but the concept of sharpness without too much contrast is possible. It looks a lot more natural than the yet great 24-120 vr! The shadows are definitely more open and this gives an impression of less sharpness but it is not so. The details are there but there is a less "digital" tonal passage. With a small mask of sharpness are indistinguishable to TA, better the old man if a wire closed; especially when evaluated throughout the frame. At TA it is softer than the 24-120 vr but if you close it at 4-4.5 it becomes sharper than the competitor in the center. At the edges is better. The autofocus is very fast to be a lens that is 15 years old but you have to give it the fine calibration to get the best. I quietly support the 36 Mpix of the D800E indeed , if you use it at 24 you do not appreciate it for what it can give. It is a very particular lens and I am no longer surprised by those who said (I do not remember) that you should have both 28-70 and 24-70 to use if necessary... At TA the edges of the blacks pull out a small purple halo. already disappears with a closing diaphragm. Bought used for less than 500 euros, if the autofocus does not make jokes does not seem good. No by chance it cost a fortune... like the son of the other!! |
  | sent on February 06, 2019 Pros: Optics valid in all respects Cons: A little weight... but on the other hand the brightness and the build quality have a price to pay. The engine can give you problems. Opinion: I have been using this lens for many years and bought it to replace a Nikon AF-D 35-70 f 2.8 and in the end also an Angenieux af 28-70 F 2.6. Personally, in many cases, I prefer its colors to those of the AF-S 24-70 f 2.8 that I have but also because of the greater weight I carry only when I think that the focal of 28 may be short. A couple of years ago I had to make him replace the engine, (in a service center in Bologna: spending 300 euros and two years of warranty) that began to stop during the focus, and now goes even better than it had always gone previously. If found used and in good condition... recommend this optics as a very good purchase. Usually, these days, if very well put and with packing, here in the area is around 750 euros... price that falls considerably if it brings signs due to use and missing the packaging and the lens hood. Then it also depends on how much the offer... since there are long periods in which there are not for sale. Take into account that most of the optical stipulations comes from the professional world so it has not been purchased to make 10 photos per year but for intensive working... which also involves long trips in the car and therefore many gasping . |
 | sent on February 06, 2019 Pros: Amazing clarity at all focal points - Return of real colors - Price used. Cons: First generation AFS engine that first whistles and then maybe plants you. - Really disproportionate weight and size. Opinion: I think it's one of the best zoom lenses designed by Nikon in this range of focal points. In some respects optically higher than the 24-70 of the latest generation: warm colors and sharpness at the highest levels at all focal points. At f 5.6 it reaches its maximum sharpness (those who measured it detected just under 4000 l/mm. Balanced contrast and never exasperated. Spectacular in B&W. A real pleasure to use it. Solid and heavy as a boulder. Sore point the AFS engine: first it starts whistling and then maybe it plants you in the ace (my whistle for 5 years). Cost of repair just over 300 Euros. The price of the used varies according to the state: with engine still working and good looking around 650/750 Euros; with engine gone (use only in manual) around 300 Euros. Knowing all this it is better to buy it? I think so! The price paid in both cases is well below the optical and mechanical quality returned (really remarkable). With motor gone the manual use of the focus is really easy, Considerable are also the dimensions: by grafting the lampshed it seems to have an oak trunk in your hands. As for the weight (around kg) you have to get used to it a little bit. Optics born to grind photographs, not recommended for out-of-door exits with machine and optics dangling on the neck... unless you have M. Tyson's neck. Then you do it! I'd buy it back a thousand more times. |
 | sent on August 01, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, speed, image quality. Cons: Weight Opinion: There's the Ho from the 2003, I also have its Sigma counterpart for Nikon, the differences are there and you see, apart from the build quality, the sigma weighs a lot less and is a 24-70, for some work it's fine, the Nikon if you have to do an event like a wedding , can give you that little bit more in terms of color and image rendition, so the differences are there and you see, the image is warmer, as in the tradition of the Nikon lenses of the past, which still makes me prefer the old zooms to new , in my opinion, too impersonal compared to the optical quality of the once, perhaps more precise, with more detail but with less "dough" than the classic Nikon optics. This particular optics, on APSC bodies is spectacular, better than many other optics that there are around, I use it and I used it on the D800 and on the D2X eo d200, even today allows you to work quietly, light permitting! |
 | sent on September 11, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, AF, Construction Cons: AF, Size and Weight, Tropicalization Opinion: My first zoom 2.8, in the hard choice with 24-70 in the end I preferred this, af faster (on d700 and d7200) and very precise. It has a spectacular yield, the colors are very natural with a fantastic pastel yield. At 28mm you already have a great wide angle that does not distort and do not even vignette at 2.8. Sharpness is amazing better than some fixes I have tried, even the fiercest "pixel peeper" will find joy for her eyes as early as 2.8. The construction is solid and massive, far from plasticous, it gives the idea that it can last for long. On the other hand, he has that damn problem on the fly that in some specimens after a while burned and Ltr asked us 300 € to work it, but if you find me like an exemplar already with af replaced you are on horseback !!! I have also put weight and dimensions against it, because the more modern 24-70 are a bit more contained in these two aspects. In conclusion is my pre-lenswound, to date it has a great value for money, with 6-700 € being used excellent and bringing home a superlative goal.rnVoto 110, no praise just because it lacks tropicalization but is a lens of other times. |
 | sent on January 14, 2017 Pros: Sharpness wide open, soft colors, construction and feeling, the used price Cons: nobody Opinion: I replaced the 24/120 f4 VR with this wonderful perspective that I found used 600 euro. What I missed in the range of focal I had it in color rendering, low-contrast and truly charming, and feeling just under appeal: the metal gives feeling of robustness and weight looks good in the shot security. I do not feel the lack of VR neither of 24 mm (which is not good quality) for which I rely on 17/35 f2.8 that for that focus is splendid. My autofocus is in place and not whistle. rnLente strongly recommended (even by those who have tried the 24-70), however, at an affordable price on the used market. |
 | sent on October 24, 2016 Pros: The best lens I know. Cons: Out of production. Opinion: Question at all ...? rnSe the autofocus does not work, it is convenient to buy it for nature photos? rnGrazie for the answer. rn ------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ----------------- |
 | sent on April 27, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, natural detail, robustness and many others Cons: Weight Opinion: And 'perspective superb, as now they do not do more, and it's hard to describe, probably only those who have had it can understand. other times built in noble materials, superb clarity but still human, shades of amazing pastel colors, open shadows, creamy bokeh, made really beautiful complexion. Much you pay with your weight, talk about almost a kg., Not just for the cervical vertebrae. Years ago I made the mistake of selling it to move to 24-70 while good, but the latter has never convinced me at all, I consider the most perspective work, unbeatable for ceremonies and events. And so I went back to 28-70, one of the few lenses that really knows how to give sensations of other times ... |
 | sent on November 12, 2015 Pros: Building, color, sharpness, price (today). Cons: Gently engine af, chromatic aberration. Opinion: really fantastic lens. The yield from f / 2.8 is already high, then if we close up to 4-5.6 is really at the top. Plays of the fantastic colors, pretty open shadows, deep colors and shades never too net. Goal that nowadays is also 700 Euros, I preferred this to the 24-70 1000 Euros and I was really happy, really recommended. The only flaw is the delicacy of the af system (I have never had similar problems but I often read that some models suffer from the failure of the engine af) and perhaps a bit of chromatic aberration of subjects with sky behind. Fantastic lens that I use to d600, practically perfect. |
 | sent on September 16, 2015 Pros: Lens lofty. Even better than many fixed lenses. AF performance and precise. Cons: Dimensions and weight unfortunately. Opinion: Lens sharpness unreachable !! Even better than many fixed lenses. No coincidence that cost a fortune. I use it for about 20 years and has never missed a beat. He never had broken it whistles as they say. A mule kick. He has made my shots and never let me down. The AF is very fast and precise. Building excellent as usual Nikon few decades ago. Just a shame that a little tired for the significant weight but gives you some satisfaction exceptional ... Highly recommended !! |
 | sent on June 02, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, Construction, AF, Price dell'usato Cons: Size and Weight, Yield Lit, Ergonomics Opinion: It 's my favorite zoom normal, I've had two: the first I replaced it with the 24-70, the second 24-70 and replaced it became my lens of choice. Compared to 24-70 I will especially appreciate the contrast less marked and more open shadows, besides rendering pastellosa common to all D and which I personally prefer. The only things that I preferred the 24-70 are the 24mm (albeit of poor quality), the yield backlight and ergonomics significantly better. Returning to 28-70 has a superior sharpness at the best fixed (I did several tests with Zeiss 35mm 1.4 and Sigma and Nikon 50mm 1.8 and 1.4) and an autofocus ultra performance; also it has built exceptionally as usual Nikon (and not as the new Pro series G). Finally the price of second is very tempting, it takes home a lens that will give great satisfaction. |
  | sent on March 20, 2015 Pros: Sharpness in TA, color rendering color, Natural Skin and not thwarted, construction and mechanical Cons: Does not have the vr ... but not even the newest 24-70 Opinion: I purchased after many delays and tests the 28-70 afs 2.8 ... I preferred to nikkor 24-70 because it has a color rendering more delicate, natural and realistic. And 'crystal clear to TA and all in all it does not feel the lack of 24 mm of the younger brother just because 28 does not distort much and how does the cartoon 24.rnrnLa construction is proof tank, solid, precise, reassuring, as old nikon were ... new ... oh well let my stare.rnIl specifically is' in the version Light gray ... to find in mint condition there are been behind two long years, but the satisfaction that gives me when I open the file to display that does not require anything in pp repays me for attesa.rnrnSe want a lens built as it should, ergonomic, the optical characteristics that place it has always been at the top of the category (Beche years ... ) at a price a little more human (that is still so much in the field of used if you find it in impeccable condition just because it is a lens to have or to try in thatrange at least once in your life) you have not only to dubbi.rnrnAttenzione troubles they might have with the motor af ... if heard hissing or whistling let it stay, trovatene un'altra.rnrn |
 | sent on July 24, 2014 Pros: Yield old style colors, sturdy construction, made in japan. Cons: Heavy as all the goals pro, engines afs delicate Opinion: I love this lens ... Since I bought it not unmount the most from my d700 .... It 's heavy but very ergonomic and balance well on bodies with battery grip, zoom range and sharpness as a reference for my taste perfect . Even I have preferred to yield less than 24-70 because of the contrast and especially for the construction of new generation plasticoni .... I just do not go down! |
 | sent on July 22, 2014 Pros: Construction, made old style, sharpness Cons: Weight, they say that the motor is gentle hissing and cracking Opinion: It's my wife, if compared to my canon L series, the Nikon wins hands basse.Vale surely the money it costs and was preferred to 24/70 to yield less contrast and sharpness is the soft passages tonali.La excellent. Suffers a little 'pushed the backlight. For those who know the 17/35, the king is very simile.rnChe say very satisfied |
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
