Any thoughts on the new Nikkor 24-70 VR?

[Netskimmer]

Hi all,

I've been wanting to get a good "walk-around"/general purpose lens for my D750 since I bought it. The one I currently have is a DX lens I purchased long ago for my D7000. I've been eyeballing the new Nikkor 24-70 VR. Has anyone here used it that can give me their impressions of it? Is it worth the extra money to get the new VR version as opposed to the older model? Some reviewers say there is a night and day difference between them and others are more "meh" Any other suggested lenses would be fine too.

I don't have any specific uses in mind. I don't shoot professionally. It will get used to take pics of just about everything from pets to buildings and landscapes. A little tight for landscapes perhaps, but better than what I currently have. I'm used to larger, heavier lenses like the 70-200 and my 50-500 so the size and weight are not an issue. Most of my lenses are on the long side and need something to flesh out the shorter focal lengths.

 

[PaulWog]

On the-digital-picture.com, using the lens comparison tool to check for sharpness, the 24-70 VR performs horrendously: Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E AF-S VR Nikkor Lens Image Quality

I have heard some bad things about the 24-70 VR from one YouTuber (but the particular one is a bit of a wack job).

I'm curious to find out if the 24-70 VR has more sample variation, or what the issue is.

 

[Netskimmer]

On the-digital-picture.com, using the lens comparison tool to check for sharpness, the 24-70 VR performs horrendously: Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E AF-S VR Nikkor Lens Image Quality

I have heard some bad things about the 24-70 VR from one YouTuber (but the particular one is a bit of a wack job).

I'm curious to find out if the 24-70 VR has more sample variation, or what the issue is.

Well that doesn't look very promising...

 

[KmH]

Any thoughts on the new Nikkor 24-70 VR?

What do they say in the Nikon Lenses forum?

 

[Netskimmer]

I didn't see the sub-forum down there. I originally posted this from work and my crappy workstation does strange things with web sites sometimes. All I saw was the Nikon Camera forum. My apologies. Mod can move the thread if they like.

 

[goodguy]

The new Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G VR is said to be not as sharp as the older none VR version.
Save your money and get the older version which apparently except not having a VR is better then the new version, its cheaper, smaller, lighter and sharper.
Another option is getting the Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VR, its even cheaper then the Nikon and it has VR or as its called by Tamron VC which is very effective.

 

[chuasam]

I have the older Version I bought 6 years ago. Price being the same I'd take the VR and sacrifice sharpness for VR. But VR costs a lot more so get the non VR.

 

[Ido]

It looks to me like Nikon sacrificed some sharpness in the center to sharpen up the corners significantly, and make it more uniform. Honestly, that combined with the addition of VR makes it a better lens for landscape in my opinion. I would also consider the 24-120mm VR, though.

 

[PaulWog]

It looks to me like Nikon sacrificed some sharpness in the center to sharpen up the corners significantly, and make it more uniform. Honestly, that combined with the addition of VR makes it a better lens for landscape in my opinion. I would also consider the 24-120mm VR, though.

The 24-120 VR is an overpriced lens. I didn't purchase it even at the 50% kit discount. I still wouldn't pay $600 for that lens.

 

[Braineack]

It looks to me like Nikon sacrificed some sharpness in the center to sharpen up the corners significantly, and make it more uniform. Honestly, that combined with the addition of VR makes it a better lens for landscape in my opinion. I would also consider the 24-120mm VR, though.

do you not use a tripod?

 

[Ido]

It looks to me like Nikon sacrificed some sharpness in the center to sharpen up the corners significantly, and make it more uniform. Honestly, that combined with the addition of VR makes it a better lens for landscape in my opinion. I would also consider the 24-120mm VR, though.

do you not use a tripod?

I do, for most of my shots. But sometimes it is useful to have image stabilization. For example, I once shot in a place with lots of small stones and it was hard to get a tripod really stable there—I got better results by handholding with the aid of image stabilization (IBIS on the Olympus E-M5, in my case).

 

[Braineack]

gotcha, was just curious.

 

[Netskimmer]

Just thought I'd mention that started a second thread in the Nikon Lens forum. Here id a link to that thread.
Need help picking a 24-70
I went with the Tamron 24-70 VC.