Old Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 still very sharp on D800

[Hooligan Dan]

Long story short, While I'm still boss hog at my newspaper, because of a contract we have with the San Francisco Chronicle I've been working for them for the past 6 months. And there I am far from the top. During a recent critique, the Chron dir. of photography told me she didn't want me shooting with my trusty Nikkor 17-35 anymore. Time to upgrade.

The LCS has a used Nikkor 28-70 that I tried out today. I tested it on my D800(I'm not worried about testing in on my D3s because it's way more forgiving of bad lenses) and I was surprised at how sharp it is. It's not on the level of the newer 24-70 but it's noticably sharper than the 17-35. I did a quick run through of 28mm at f/2.8 and f/5.6 and 70mm at f/2.8 and f/5.6. I'm happy enough with the quick results that I can't see spending the extra 400-800 dollars on a used/new 24-70 for a slightly wider angle and weather sealing(my 17-35 has been through rain, dust, mud and salt water without a problem).

Here's are the 28mm shots.

 

[DiskoJoe]

For a wide angle the 14-24mm f2.8 cant be beat. My friend has one and its quite amazing. I would say definitely worth the money for a working photog.You should make them front you some cash so you can get the holy trinity.

 

[Hooligan Dan]

While I agree the 14-24 is a great lens it's not a good photojournalism lens. It would also kinda be the opposite of what the chron wants since the dir. doesn't want me shooting wider than 24mm anymore.

 

[Mike_E]

I have and old Tokina 28-80mm f2.8 that I bought new -old stock- from a camera store in Japan that works quite well with My D800 so I'm not at all surprised with your results.

Being able to downsize your files makes the camera far more forgiving than most seem to believe.



I like the shots btw.