I loved mine from day one, but accidentally dropped it from a short height in 2019, costing about $700 in repairs and then again, about a month ago. It’s sitting on a shelf until I can afford to have it repaired again. I guess tanks aren’t built like they used to be.
Patrick Smith
March 26, 2022 12:50 pm
I’ve had three copies of this lens, but inspected another I didn’t buy. There is no doubt sample variation. There are some bad copies, which are acceptably sharp in the center and horribly blurry in the mid-frames and corners. The one copy I looked at was like that. Just bad. It either had a decentered lens element or some other manufacturing error. This however is not a Nikon only issue or even just a 24-70 VR issue. No sample variety exist in many lenses, but some more than others. Nikons other example is the 200-500mm lens, which there are great copies of and some who nowhere near as sharp as the hood copies. My current copy is sharp wide open at f/2.8 even out into the corners. By f/4-f/5.6 this lens really shines. My new copy has the newer dark-gray writing on the rear lens barrel where it says SWM VR ED Made In Japan 10 years, etc. This is the style of text on the new Z-mount lenses as well and I was told Nikon started this change in 2018, so any Nikon F-mount lens with dark gray text on the rear lens barrel is made after 2018. One thing I’ve seen consistently is manufactures fixing issues like sample variation over time. Nikon often finds out about these issues and tightens up the manufacturing process and technicians. So buying a new lens a few years after it originally came out, typically reduces the chances you’ll get a bad copy.
Anyways, I highly recommend the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E VR, it’s an amazing lens in almost every way. It’s sharp, it’s colors and contrast are amazing, it’s autofocus is very fast and it’s VR really works well. I can handhold this lens for as slow as a one second long exposure and get sharp results. Obviously not every shot, but if I take a small burst, I usually can get a decently sharp image around 1/2 to a full second. That’s impressive VR, especially for situations where you can’t bring or don’t have a tripod, VR is a life-saver. If you’re going to buy this lens, buy a new copy or used copy from a reputable Nikon Authorized dealer of your home country. I buy my new gear locally at a store or from B&H, Adorama or Allan’s Camera. Used I now only buy from one store…MPB.com! They are awesome, they have a great inspection process and knowledgeable used staff of buyers. You will not get a bad used copy from them, which means you can avoid the chance of getting a bad sample! I bought a lens from mpb.com and it arrived in almost brand new condition with the box and unmarked warranty card, everything, plus it came next day air. They have excellent customer service and I trust them, whereas I never felt comfortable buying from KEH and the like. If you’re reading this now in 2022, this is a great lens. It’s the best 24-70mm f/2.8 ever made by anybody for DSLR’s. I’ve heard the Z-mount mirrorless is slightly better, especially in the corners, but I love my copy. I have no plans whatsoever to buy any Z-mount lenses.
Rob
June 15, 2020 7:50 pm
Thank you very much for an excellent review! I purchased this lens yesterday and look forward to its use.
One question I have is the use of graduated ND filters. I used a P-size Cokin filter holder for my Galen Rowell/Singh Ray filters on my older/smaller 24-85 lens. For the 24-70, do I need to step up to larger GND filters and the type Z filter holder?
Thanks in advance
Mark Rutledge
November 23, 2018 7:20 pm
Greetings, Nasim,
I very much appreciate your reviewing style, and your candid manner in sharing the results of your testing. I have put a great deal of weight on your results, when buying my own lenses. I recently upgraded from my first DSLR, the Nikon D7000, to my first FX Nikon, the D750, and love the new camera! For what I photograph, that camera is perfect. Likewise, before springing for my Nikon 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 50 f1.8, Nikon 105 f2.8 Micro, and Nikon 70-200 f2.8E FL, I read, and re-read your reviews, and when the time came to spend my hard-earned money, I have been super happy with every item I’ve purchased, thanks in large part to your excellent reviews!! Many thanks, Sir!!
Now, however, I am in a quandary about adding in a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 to my camera bag. I am most interested in super sharp centers, as I take more photos of people, animals, and other such things, and when I do want to take good landscape photos, I’ve been over the moon with my 14-24 f2.8!! I had made up my mind to get the older 24-70 f2.8G ED, because of it’s excellent center sharpness. But, when the new 24-70 VR came on the scene, I gave thought to getting the newer version, instead of the old one. BUT, as my 14-24 is already doing a great job for landscapes, I’d be more interested in getting the Nikon Mid-zoom that offers me tack-sharp centers, with less emphasis on the corners. Whilst VR is tempting, I worry that the newest version of the 24-70 f2.8 will not give me the sharpness I am seeking when taking portraits, when out and about with only the 24-70.
May I ask your thoughts on my situation, please? I am still leaning towards the older G version of the 24-70, but worry about the sticky zoom problems that crop up with that lens, in some copies. Your comments and suggestions, will be much appreciated!! Thanks, again, for the fantastic work you do for those of us who are aspiring to be better, and more learned about the magic, and enjoyment that photography brings!! Take care, and God Bless!
Every Good Wish, “Doc” Mark
Roy
October 27, 2018 1:15 pm
Thanks for the excellent ”real life use” review of this lens Nasim. In general very much enjoy reading Photography Life reviews – they have a sole and character rarely seen elsewhere :-).
I for one was highly skeptical about purchasing this lens based on the proliferation of reviews reporting softness and I have to admit also strongly swayed by Dxomark’s negative test data. I really wanted to go with a Nikkor 24-70 for my D850 for full, unquestionable compatibilty and also guaranteed forward compatibility within the Nikon ecosystem. Was also considering Tamron 24-70 G2, but your review was enough to ease my concerns and go ahead and purchase the Nikkor 24-70 ED VR.
Only had the combo a for a couple of days now, and limited testing so far, but I believe I already see the potential of this lens to provide uniform and satisfying results.
Amol
October 8, 2018 2:33 pm
The reviews on this site are the best on interwebs. I had a habit of reading reviews with charts rather than actual photos and could never bring myself to bring *any* lens. Most of the websites make you paranoid dropping large amount of money based on numbers rather than actual on field experience. Thanks for such reviews! Having said that, I would like some more opinion about this lens vs 24-120 f4. I was actually expecting a comparison with that lens and how it fares. I will be primarily using these lenses on my DX camera and then eventually upgrade to FX (D750 mostly). Any inputs welcome!
Dave
August 12, 2018 5:11 pm
Good evening. I’m debating on which version of this lens to buy for the Burning Man festival later this month. I know they both are weather sealed, so both are “safe” to take.
But in terms of optical performance, it looks like the old one is the better choice for portraits, according to what you and others have said? Then again, I’ll be shooting some scenics and landscapes too. So if I stop the old one down to 5.6, or 8, it should be just fine right?
In any case, when you have a moment, please comment on how you think the new VR version is for portraits, in the head shot to full length distance range. Thank you.
james
July 3, 2018 9:43 am
I did a ton of research and first bought the Tamron 24-70 G2. It was great-except when shooting at f2.8, where it was very soft with autofocus issues. It also showed markedly worse performance in low light. So I ordered another copy of the Tamron, along with the Nikon 24-70 VR. Tamron had the same issues, Nikon blew me away with its quality. My takeaway was that if you need the performance at f2.8 the Nikon is hands down the winner. I kept the Nikon and have been very happy with it. Thanks for the detailed reviews!
Doug
June 22, 2018 9:30 am
I do not know if I am missing something but I recently auditioned a Sigma 24-105, the tamron 24-70, and the Nikon 24-70 VR and the older nikkor 35-70 2.8 yields much better images. More contrast, sharper in center(where it counts) and just plain renders better especially visible in black and white captures. Call me crazy but I am scratching my head trying to figure out what is so impressive with these new designs. I sometimes wonder if its just the quality of glass used, the amount of glass, etc. Kind of disappointed and shocked to say the least. I thought I was upgrading. lol. Maybe not.
Nasim is great. For amongst other things, being honest with his opinions AND honest posting of actual original images. They speak more than words.
That said, would agree with Doug. After seeing Nasim’s review I was blown away by the color rendition. Most important thing for me, all other aspects being at lease acceptable. So want to rush right out and get a couple.
But after trying several copies of this lens out I do conclude this lens to be unusable. Almost cost me work when turned in some images. The characteristic “bite”, “attack” and “depth” ( others words ) am known for and that sets me apart was gone.
Primarily use primes and suffer through the more than occasional weddings am talked into doing using them. Rather than using a 24-70mm to reduce my competitive edge ( my brand if you will – being in part extraordinary technical performance ) It, in and of itself, gets me a lot of work, dollars and great personal reward.
As am getting older getting VERY lazy and always looking for convenience and this lens is not it. Not against zooms per-say, and have found at least two users. The 14-24mm ( love it ) and all the 70&80-200mms made since the f/4 AIS ( almost love them all ). So not against zooms. But they must perform.
So what to do? Sigma?
Lance
June 20, 2018 1:37 am
Hi Nasim,
As usual, an excellent review and I agree with most of your conclusions and thoughts on this lens. Having used this lens now for just over 2 years, I can say that this is quite an amazing lens, especially for landscape and general duties and walk about photography. It is at it’s best at the 3+mts where sharpness is excellent. I now almost exclusively use the 24-70 f2.8E VR and do *not* bother using my primes, the 24 f1.4G nor Sigma 35 f1.4 Art for landscape duties, only using the fast primes when I want to use creative shallow DOF. The overall IQ of this lens is simply superb, great colors like a prime and sharpness from edge to edge and corner to corner. This lens is a remarkable feat by the Nikon engineers. As you have stated, test charts do not tell the full story, this lens is sharp, sharp, sharp! I also had the 24-70 f2.8G and evaluated both lenses back to back for about 6 months and sold the G version, the new E version is simply better in just about every department. The only down sides are that it is big and expensive, but it is so good in all other departments that these slight drawbacks pale into insignificance. A highly recommended lens.
I loved mine from day one, but accidentally dropped it from a short height in 2019, costing about $700 in repairs and then again, about a month ago. It’s sitting on a shelf until I can afford to have it repaired again. I guess tanks aren’t built like they used to be.
I’ve had three copies of this lens, but inspected another I didn’t buy. There is no doubt sample variation. There are some bad copies, which are acceptably sharp in the center and horribly blurry in the mid-frames and corners. The one copy I looked at was like that. Just bad. It either had a decentered lens element or some other manufacturing error. This however is not a Nikon only issue or even just a 24-70 VR issue. No sample variety exist in many lenses, but some more than others. Nikons other example is the 200-500mm lens, which there are great copies of and some who nowhere near as sharp as the hood copies. My current copy is sharp wide open at f/2.8 even out into the corners. By f/4-f/5.6 this lens really shines. My new copy has the newer dark-gray writing on the rear lens barrel where it says SWM VR ED Made In Japan 10 years, etc. This is the style of text on the new Z-mount lenses as well and I was told Nikon started this change in 2018, so any Nikon F-mount lens with dark gray text on the rear lens barrel is made after 2018. One thing I’ve seen consistently is manufactures fixing issues like sample variation over time. Nikon often finds out about these issues and tightens up the manufacturing process and technicians. So buying a new lens a few years after it originally came out, typically reduces the chances you’ll get a bad copy.
Anyways, I highly recommend the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8E VR, it’s an amazing lens in almost every way. It’s sharp, it’s colors and contrast are amazing, it’s autofocus is very fast and it’s VR really works well. I can handhold this lens for as slow as a one second long exposure and get sharp results. Obviously not every shot, but if I take a small burst, I usually can get a decently sharp image around 1/2 to a full second. That’s impressive VR, especially for situations where you can’t bring or don’t have a tripod, VR is a life-saver. If you’re going to buy this lens, buy a new copy or used copy from a reputable Nikon Authorized dealer of your home country. I buy my new gear locally at a store or from B&H, Adorama or Allan’s Camera. Used I now only buy from one store…MPB.com! They are awesome, they have a great inspection process and knowledgeable used staff of buyers. You will not get a bad used copy from them, which means you can avoid the chance of getting a bad sample! I bought a lens from mpb.com and it arrived in almost brand new condition with the box and unmarked warranty card, everything, plus it came next day air. They have excellent customer service and I trust them, whereas I never felt comfortable buying from KEH and the like. If you’re reading this now in 2022, this is a great lens. It’s the best 24-70mm f/2.8 ever made by anybody for DSLR’s. I’ve heard the Z-mount mirrorless is slightly better, especially in the corners, but I love my copy. I have no plans whatsoever to buy any Z-mount lenses.
Thank you very much for an excellent review! I purchased this lens yesterday and look forward to its use.
One question I have is the use of graduated ND filters. I used a P-size Cokin filter holder for my Galen Rowell/Singh Ray filters on my older/smaller 24-85 lens. For the 24-70, do I need to step up to larger GND filters and the type Z filter holder?
Thanks in advance
Greetings, Nasim,
I very much appreciate your reviewing style, and your candid manner in sharing the results of your testing. I have put a great deal of weight on your results, when buying my own lenses. I recently upgraded from my first DSLR, the Nikon D7000, to my first FX Nikon, the D750, and love the new camera! For what I photograph, that camera is perfect. Likewise, before springing for my Nikon 14-24 f2.8, Nikon 50 f1.8, Nikon 105 f2.8 Micro, and Nikon 70-200 f2.8E FL, I read, and re-read your reviews, and when the time came to spend my hard-earned money, I have been super happy with every item I’ve purchased, thanks in large part to your excellent reviews!! Many thanks, Sir!!
Now, however, I am in a quandary about adding in a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 to my camera bag. I am most interested in super sharp centers, as I take more photos of people, animals, and other such things, and when I do want to take good landscape photos, I’ve been over the moon with my 14-24 f2.8!! I had made up my mind to get the older 24-70 f2.8G ED, because of it’s excellent center sharpness. But, when the new 24-70 VR came on the scene, I gave thought to getting the newer version, instead of the old one. BUT, as my 14-24 is already doing a great job for landscapes, I’d be more interested in getting the Nikon Mid-zoom that offers me tack-sharp centers, with less emphasis on the corners. Whilst VR is tempting, I worry that the newest version of the 24-70 f2.8 will not give me the sharpness I am seeking when taking portraits, when out and about with only the 24-70.
May I ask your thoughts on my situation, please? I am still leaning towards the older G version of the 24-70, but worry about the sticky zoom problems that crop up with that lens, in some copies. Your comments and suggestions, will be much appreciated!! Thanks, again, for the fantastic work you do for those of us who are aspiring to be better, and more learned about the magic, and enjoyment that photography brings!! Take care, and God Bless!
Every Good Wish,
“Doc” Mark
Thanks for the excellent ”real life use” review of this lens Nasim. In general very much enjoy reading Photography Life reviews – they have a sole and character rarely seen elsewhere :-).
I for one was highly skeptical about purchasing this lens based on the proliferation of reviews reporting softness and I have to admit also strongly swayed by Dxomark’s negative test data. I really wanted to go with a Nikkor 24-70 for my D850 for full, unquestionable compatibilty and also guaranteed forward compatibility within the Nikon ecosystem. Was also considering Tamron 24-70 G2, but your review was enough to ease my concerns and go ahead and purchase the Nikkor 24-70 ED VR.
Only had the combo a for a couple of days now, and limited testing so far, but I believe I already see the potential of this lens to provide uniform and satisfying results.
The reviews on this site are the best on interwebs. I had a habit of reading reviews with charts rather than actual photos and could never bring myself to bring *any* lens. Most of the websites make you paranoid dropping large amount of money based on numbers rather than actual on field experience.
Thanks for such reviews!
Having said that, I would like some more opinion about this lens vs 24-120 f4. I was actually expecting a comparison with that lens and how it fares.
I will be primarily using these lenses on my DX camera and then eventually upgrade to FX (D750 mostly). Any inputs welcome!
Good evening. I’m debating on which version of this lens to buy for the Burning Man festival later this month. I know they both are weather sealed, so both are “safe” to take.
But in terms of optical performance, it looks like the old one is the better choice for portraits, according to what you and others have said? Then again, I’ll be shooting some scenics and landscapes too. So if I stop the old one down to 5.6, or 8, it should be just fine right?
In any case, when you have a moment, please comment on how you think the new VR version is for portraits, in the head shot to full length distance range. Thank you.
I did a ton of research and first bought the Tamron 24-70 G2. It was great-except when shooting at f2.8, where it was very soft with autofocus issues. It also showed markedly worse performance in low light. So I ordered another copy of the Tamron, along with the Nikon 24-70 VR. Tamron had the same issues, Nikon blew me away with its quality. My takeaway was that if you need the performance at f2.8 the Nikon is hands down the winner. I kept the Nikon and have been very happy with it. Thanks for the detailed reviews!
I do not know if I am missing something but I recently auditioned a Sigma 24-105, the tamron 24-70, and the Nikon 24-70 VR and the older nikkor 35-70 2.8 yields much better images. More contrast, sharper in center(where it counts) and just plain renders better especially visible in black and white captures. Call me crazy but I am scratching my head trying to figure out what is so impressive with these new designs. I sometimes wonder if its just the quality of glass used, the amount of glass, etc. Kind of disappointed and shocked to say the least. I thought I was upgrading. lol. Maybe not.
I would agree that the older 35-70 2.8 is an excellent lens.
Nasim is great. For amongst other things, being honest with his opinions AND honest posting of actual original images. They speak more than words.
That said, would agree with Doug. After seeing Nasim’s review I was blown away by the color rendition. Most important thing for me, all other aspects being at lease acceptable. So want to rush right out and get a couple.
But after trying several copies of this lens out I do conclude this lens to be unusable. Almost cost me work when turned in some images. The characteristic “bite”, “attack” and “depth” ( others words ) am known for and that sets me apart was gone.
Primarily use primes and suffer through the more than occasional weddings am talked into doing using them. Rather than using a 24-70mm to reduce my competitive edge ( my brand if you will – being in part extraordinary technical performance ) It, in and of itself, gets me a lot of work, dollars and great personal reward.
As am getting older getting VERY lazy and always looking for convenience and this lens is not it. Not against zooms per-say, and have found at least two users. The 14-24mm ( love it ) and all the 70&80-200mms made since the f/4 AIS ( almost love them all ). So not against zooms. But they must perform.
So what to do? Sigma?
Hi Nasim,
As usual, an excellent review and I agree with most of your conclusions and thoughts on this lens. Having used this lens now for just over 2 years, I can say that this is quite an amazing lens, especially for landscape and general duties and walk about photography. It is at it’s best at the 3+mts where sharpness is excellent. I now almost exclusively use the 24-70 f2.8E VR and do *not* bother using my primes, the 24 f1.4G nor Sigma 35 f1.4 Art for landscape duties, only using the fast primes when I want to use creative shallow DOF. The overall IQ of this lens is simply superb, great colors like a prime and sharpness from edge to edge and corner to corner. This lens is a remarkable feat by the Nikon engineers. As you have stated, test charts do not tell the full story, this lens is sharp, sharp, sharp! I also had the 24-70 f2.8G and evaluated both lenses back to back for about 6 months and sold the G version, the new E version is simply better in just about every department. The only down sides are that it is big and expensive, but it is so good in all other departments that these slight drawbacks pale into insignificance. A highly recommended lens.