$10 for a 35-70 2.8D?!?!?!!?!?
FUUUUUUUUU......
I'm not sure how attached you are to your 28D, but you could probably
ebay it and get the 24G and pocket some change. The 24G on the D700 is just incredible.
I've heard the 35 f1.4ais is pretty funky towards the sides on FX, never used one in person, but have heard alot of mixed reviews. many say it's amazing, but soft wide open and has about the worst coma you can imagine outside the DX frame.
I owned the 20-35 2.8 for 2 weeks, it's OK on a D700. There's alot of CA that never goes away, and never gets sharp in the corners. However distortion at 20mm is almost non-existent. I never was able to get a good jive with it, which is why i sold it.
I used to own the 35-70 2.8, i've never used it on FF digital, but i have a friend who owns it and likes it.
The 85 1.4D is soft towards the sides and the corners never really get
sharp when stopped down. Beautiful lens for portraits though, on FF and the closer working distances it just obliterates the backgrounds.
The 50 f/1.8 is pretty uninteresting compared to everything else. super sharp when stopped down, but soft wide open and has lousy bokeh.
Never used the 300mm.
The 70-200VR vignettes alot for how expensive it is and the corners only get OK at 200mm. Than again, who puts the subjects in the corners on a 200mm? this lens is awesome on FF.
The biggest thing you'll notice (besides noise and DR) is the D700's per-pixel output might be a little softer than the D200 and is
alot softer than the D70. The D70 has a very weak AA filter, the D700 is a bit too aggressive IMO. It initially threw me off when i first got mine (i upgraded from a D70). It will need more sharpening that what you might be accustomed to, which is sad because it brings up more noise. Luckily on the D700 you can stack 10 images at once in the camera making an ISO 3200 image clean and an ISO 200 image immaculate to the point where you can push the exposure in post by 3 stops and see almost no consequence.