Could the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 drop in price any further?

[PaulWog]

Currently it is $1700 Canadian brand new. That is about $500 out of my already unreasonable price-range. It is a lens I am looking at getting within the next 12 months. I like to pretend as though I like primes, but I find prime lenses tend to be tremendously inconvenient. I have no plans to sell my 50mm 1.8G or 85mm 1.8G to fund the lens though.

Just curious if anyone else has any thoughts on the 'older' Nikon 24-70 f2.8.

 

[astroNikon]

It's one of those things ... you just have to bite the bullet and spend the money at times.
Looks like you did that with your Sigma 150-600.

The 24-70s prices are out of my range too but I'm satisfied with my 24-85 for now.
I've even looked at the 28-70s which are a little more affordable but still out of my range.
I guess I'm comfortable enough with my 24-85 where I don't need to make the $$ jump.

 

[goodguy]

Did you consider to do what I did and buy your lens used ?

I dont expect the Nikon 24-70mm 2.8 non VR to drop new or used, the new VR is getting very little love out there while the older version is a sharp proven lens.

As astroNison said sometimes you got to bite the bullet and get the lens.
Just like you I have tons of respect to primes but they are such a pain to constantly switch that the 24-70mm is the perfect solution.
Get it, you will not be sorry.

BTW did you consider the Tamron version instead the Nikon one ?
From all reviews it sounds like a very good piece of glass and its much cheaper then the Nikon version.

 

[jaomul]

You know your own needs. When I had ff this lens was one I looked at (albeit Canon). No way could I justify its price or indeed it's size. I found the 24-105 to be way more useful, indeed a 24-85 @ a fraction of the price in Nikon mount seems an attractive proposition.

The question is with ff being so good these days, especially taking in iso ability etc, do you need f2.8 throughout the range. Maybe yes but, maybe no, but it's an expensive commodity if you don't

 

[Braineack]

this 24-70 2.8 is going to techncailly be the "old" one as a VR version is now available (or going to be)

 

[goodguy]

this 24-70 2.8 is going to techncailly be the "old" one as a VR version is now available (or going to be)

The new VR as far as I know is already available, as I mentioned there is very little love to the new VR lens.
I think people like me who own the older version will not bother to get it.
Frankly if I wanted/needed a 24-70mm with VR I would get the Tamron, now that I own the Tamron 70-200mm I know how good these Tamron lenses are and well worth their price.
Paying 2300$ for the new VR is insane to me.

 

[PaulWog]

The new VR is something I would not consider for 2 reasons: Size and price. The original Nikon 24-70 is large, the VR version is an XL.

I am seriously considering the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC. I am not enthused about a lot of the pre-2013 3rd-party lenses, or the bokeh, but otherwise the lens looks nice.

 

[PaulWog]

Any recommendations for testing a Tamron 24-70 VC in a store? Ideally I would have two to compare against each other, or a Nikon 24-70 to compare against it for 1:1 sharpness in the center, and corners. And something to test for field curvature at 24mm, 50mm, and 70mm. And of course check for focus accuracy. I have heard about copies of the Tamron that are decentered, or have sharpness issues -- don't know how prevalent that really is.

I was really trying to budget out and make excuses for a Nikon 24-70, but even the original is a tad bit large by a good inch. Good copy vs. good copy, the only difference for me would be bokeh & brand/warranty... the up-side to the Tamron is VC and price.

 

[Braineack]

It's smaller, lighter, VC enabled, cheaper, while at the same time being as sharp (if not better), it focuses fast, and it's well built.

The bokeh is something that can be compared subjectively. The Tamron 24-70 doesn't have as "pleasing" of bokeh balls. But I think the transition from focus to blur looks good and OOF areas are smooth and clean.

They carry a 5 year warranty and everytime I've dealt with Tamron, it's been positive. (I've sent back in my 150-600 for a firmware update).

One other thing you may not like is that it telescopes, where the Nikon is always the same length.

But I'm never sitting at my computer after shooting with it and still not blown away with how sharp and great the images it captures look.