24-70 f/2.8 or set of primes?

[astroNikon]

The prime AF-D are nice and compact primes.
The AF-S G all have the focus motor in the lens, electronic aperture control all which take up more room thus are larger. So for AF compactness the AF-D are it.

The 24mm has a 1 foot close focus. I don't know the 35mm close focus. I really enjoyed the 24mm AF-D & 50mm AF-D compactness.

But I have so much overlap at 24 & 35mm it made no sense. The 18-35, 24-85 both overlap.
So other than a fast aperture I had the 24 & 35 twice covered.
But give yourself some time to get a new lens into the setup that you have.

I never thought much about the 24 2.8D but I'm finding kind of interesting and its really affordable. Seen really nice copies on ebay around $200! From my understanding, that lens focuses insanely fast. (but its wide anyways, not much to focus lol) But I'm really considering that lens because it might be great option for milky way shots. Sure..its not a 1.8 but it is wide enough and 2.8 is still faster than f/4. Plus if I stack the shots, I reckon I can get some nice milky way shots with that lens.

FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

 

[nerwin]

The prime AF-D are nice and compact primes.
The AF-S G all have the focus motor in the lens, electronic aperture control all which take up more room thus are larger. So for AF compactness the AF-D are it.

The 24mm has a 1 foot close focus. I don't know the 35mm close focus. I really enjoyed the 24mm AF-D & 50mm AF-D compactness.

But I have so much overlap at 24 & 35mm it made no sense. The 18-35, 24-85 both overlap.
So other than a fast aperture I had the 24 & 35 twice covered.
But give yourself some time to get a new lens into the setup that you have.

I never thought much about the 24 2.8D but I'm finding kind of interesting and its really affordable. Seen really nice copies on ebay around $200! From my understanding, that lens focuses insanely fast. (but its wide anyways, not much to focus lol) But I'm really considering that lens because it might be great option for milky way shots. Sure..its not a 1.8 but it is wide enough and 2.8 is still faster than f/4. Plus if I stack the shots, I reckon I can get some nice milky way shots with that lens.

FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

Doesn't Lightroom have a lens profile for the 24 2.8D? That surely must fix some of the distortion.

 

[table1349]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

 

[nerwin]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

Hipster lenses? What's wrong with primes?

 

[astroNikon]

The prime AF-D are nice and compact primes.
The AF-S G all have the focus motor in the lens, electronic aperture control all which take up more room thus are larger. So for AF compactness the AF-D are it.

The 24mm has a 1 foot close focus. I don't know the 35mm close focus. I really enjoyed the 24mm AF-D & 50mm AF-D compactness.

But I have so much overlap at 24 & 35mm it made no sense. The 18-35, 24-85 both overlap.
So other than a fast aperture I had the 24 & 35 twice covered.
But give yourself some time to get a new lens into the setup that you have.

I never thought much about the 24 2.8D but I'm finding kind of interesting and its really affordable. Seen really nice copies on ebay around $200! From my understanding, that lens focuses insanely fast. (but its wide anyways, not much to focus lol) But I'm really considering that lens because it might be great option for milky way shots. Sure..its not a 1.8 but it is wide enough and 2.8 is still faster than f/4. Plus if I stack the shots, I reckon I can get some nice milky way shots with that lens.

FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

Doesn't Lightroom have a lens profile for the 24 2.8D? That surely must fix some of the distortion.

Yes it does.
But you have to remember when you correct for distortion you also end up cropping the image some. With the more severe aspects of the corners leaning in when you have some vertical objects near the edge, after correction you end up cropping a good amount of the edges/bottom away.

 

[table1349]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

Hipster lenses? What's wrong with primes?

Nothing, but when it distorts your mustache it is a hipster lens.

 

[nerwin]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

Hipster lenses? What's wrong with primes?

Nothing, but when it distorts your mustache it is a hipster lens.

Well I can't grow a mustache anyways. So I don't have to worry about that.

 

[astroNikon]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

They all work with the Nikon Df .. the hipster camera.

 

[nerwin]

The prime AF-D are nice and compact primes.
The AF-S G all have the focus motor in the lens, electronic aperture control all which take up more room thus are larger. So for AF compactness the AF-D are it.

The 24mm has a 1 foot close focus. I don't know the 35mm close focus. I really enjoyed the 24mm AF-D & 50mm AF-D compactness.

But I have so much overlap at 24 & 35mm it made no sense. The 18-35, 24-85 both overlap.
So other than a fast aperture I had the 24 & 35 twice covered.
But give yourself some time to get a new lens into the setup that you have.

I never thought much about the 24 2.8D but I'm finding kind of interesting and its really affordable. Seen really nice copies on ebay around $200! From my understanding, that lens focuses insanely fast. (but its wide anyways, not much to focus lol) But I'm really considering that lens because it might be great option for milky way shots. Sure..its not a 1.8 but it is wide enough and 2.8 is still faster than f/4. Plus if I stack the shots, I reckon I can get some nice milky way shots with that lens.

FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

Doesn't Lightroom have a lens profile for the 24 2.8D? That surely must fix some of the distortion.

Yes it does.
But you have to remember when you correct for distortion you also end up cropping the image some. With the more severe aspects of the corners leaning in when you have some vertical objects near the edge, after correction you end up cropping a good amount of the edges/bottom away.

I was hearing something similar to that from the 16-35 f/4 and 18-35G debates. When you correct the 16-35 at 16mm, its more closer to 18mm but when you correct the 18-35 at 18mm, its closer to 20mm.

 

[table1349]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

Hipster lenses? What's wrong with primes?

Nothing, but when it distorts your mustache it is a hipster lens.

Well I can't grow a mustache anyways. So I don't have to worry about that.

You will someday. When that time comes, don't worry, your change of voice will only last a short time.

 

[nerwin]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

Hipster lenses? What's wrong with primes?

Nothing, but when it distorts your mustache it is a hipster lens.

Well I can't grow a mustache anyways. So I don't have to worry about that.

You will someday. When that time comes, don't worry, your change of voice will only last a short time.

I'm 26 and my facial hair only grows to a certain point and stops. I guess I'm not a man.

 

[nerwin]

Back to the topic,

So the consensus is NOT get the 24 2.8D?

 

[table1349]

[
FYI, if I recall my 24mm AF-D had both mustache distortion and the far ends curved in a lot. My 24-85/2.8-4.0 AF-D at 24/2.8 had much less distortion.

I have my zooms and primes too. I Mostly use zooms but I pull out the primes (50 & 85) every so often.

I didn't know that Nikon had hipster lenses.

Hipster lenses? What's wrong with primes?

Nothing, but when it distorts your mustache it is a hipster lens.

Well I can't grow a mustache anyways. So I don't have to worry about that.

You will someday. When that time comes, don't worry, your change of voice will only last a short time.

I'm 26 and my facial hair only grows to a certain point and stops. I guess I'm not a man.

It could be worse.

 

[DScience]

Here is what I would suggest. Rather then just trying to acquire lenses to 'fill the bag' you should find out what sort of pictures you aspire to take, and see what type of lenses are necessary for that purpose. For example, if you wanted to get into astrophotography, then it wouldn't make sense to get a 24-70mm f/2.8 over a fast prime lens. On the other hand, if you were interested in getting paid gigs to photography events, then the 24-70 would be the choice. If you decided you wanted to get really creamy bokeh shots with thin DOF, then you would want a fast prime lens, 50-100 mm range.

Get my point?

 

[DScience]

I have a mint condition 24mm f/2.8D that I would sell for cheap.