24-70 lens help!!

[sovietdoc]

24-70.....especially on a crop sensor camera is just excruciatingly boring and devoid of character.

"Boring" is a state of ones mind.

 

[HughGuessWho]

Don't get the 24-70, ...

24-70.....especially on a crop sensor camera is just excruciatingly boring and devoid of character.

I have never heard such a statement. You are certainly in the minority.

 

[o hey tyler]

"Boring" is a state of ones mind.

The 24-70/2.8 range is boring in general. Even on a FF camera IMO. It just lacks character and originality. It's a convenience focal range with a relatively large aperture. Most of the time, it generates a yawn fest for my girlfriend and I.

 

[The_Traveler]

I agree with the boring part.

Many's the hour I have sat at my desk, the 24/70 adjacent not saying a damn word!

Nothing, no jokes, no comments, doesn't care what music I play, inert to anything I do.


The only time that lens is any good is when I put it on a camera and shoot with it; then it's really terrific.

I guess I'll just live with the boring times.

 

[o hey tyler]

The only time that lens is any good is when I put it on a camera and shoot with it; then it's really terrific.

Which is solely your opinion. As the lens/focal length/max aperture is boring to both Switch and I.

IMO it produces middle of the road images with decent image quality.

 

[sovietdoc]

I don't believe in a generalization that a lens can be boring. Stating that it is boring, is just like confirming your own inability to create.


EDIT:

To clarify, I'd say that a lens as a object can be boring. Just like looking at a light post could be boring if you do it for 8 hours a day for 3 months. However, using any particular lens to create photos, doesn't automatically make the photos boring. It's all a matter of your vision and skill.

 

[o hey tyler]

I don't believe in a generalization that a lens can be boring. Stating that it is boring, is just like confirming your own inability to create.

No, it's just boring. I have plenty of ability to create. I just don't like using "convenient" lenses. I don't like using the "go to" lens because it's the "go to" lens. I like mixing it up and not using such pedestrian glass. It makes for more intriguing images.

 

[pixmedic]

I find we use our 17-55 f/2.8 far more than our 28-75 f/2.8, but im still a bigger fan of our 50mm f/1.4, or 35mm f/1.8.
our fast zooms are Tamrons, due to budgetary reasons, but I think they still deliver good results. eventually we will replace them with Nikkor.
I imagine a good and creative photographer can produce great results with whatever lens they are presented with. everything else becomes a matter of taste and/or convenience.

 

[The_Traveler]

I find lenses and camera bodies pedestrian and boring.
Even senors bore me.

I shall create images strictly through the power of my mind, directed by my enormous creative spirit, by causing various voltages to align themselves in suitable patterrns on a cf card.

I am also working on a strictly cereberal raw converter.

 

[o hey tyler]

I find lenses and camera bodies pedestrian and boring.
Even senors bore me.

I shall create images strictly through the power of my mind, directed by my enormous creative spirit, by causing various voltages to align themselves in suitable patterrns on a cf card.

I am also working on a strictly cereberal raw converter.

Cool bro. I hope your images are entertaining.

 

[sleist]

I find lenses and camera bodies pedestrian and boring.
Even senors bore me.​

My next purchase will be the BIG box of Crayola crayons.
The one with the sharpener in the back of the box (prosumer model).

 

[djacobox372]

Nikon is definitely the best, but for a lot more $$.

You might want to consider the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, it's gives you the same zoom range as the 24-70mm f2.8 does on full frame.

IMO 17-50 is a better range then 24-70mm when you're using a crop body.

 

[Solarflare]

Nikon is definitely the best, but for a lot more $$.

You might want to consider the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, it's gives you the same zoom range as the 24-70mm f2.8 does on full frame.

IMO 17-50 is a better range then 24-70mm when you're using a crop body.

Depends upon what you like to shoot.

If Nikon would create an AF-S 28-85mm f/2.8 DX VR2 that is already great at f/2.8, has good Bokeh and fast autofocus, I would switch to that and never use any other lens again. Can cost 2000$ or more, I wouldnt care, just as long as I get the corresponding quality for that price.