It’s a great Lens for real, Nasim – but for myself, this 24-70 2.8G Nikkor is 1) really being over-priced, for what it is ( I am a 28-70 2.8 Nikon Owner), and 2) It’s not *that* much better, vs. the former one.
A great review from you, like always. The only thing i didn’t like here – the Picture being made with your D3S – the greens are looking artificial, way overprocessed, as well as the rainbow, no offense.
Good Light!
Vern Rogers
December 16, 2017 11:01 am
I know this review was written some time ago, but I just recently bought the marvelous 24-70 G and it is everything that is said about it! I am totally impressed! Even though I already have the 24-120 f4, I find the 24-70 to be a much better lens. Build quality, image quality and fast f2.8 aperture make it a winner. I have read lots about its weight being so heavy. I was concerned about that but have found the concerns to be overblown! In fact, I was surprised to find that the lens was not heavy at all in my view, and I am a yongster of 81! But then I carry a D500 and big Sigma 150-600 C around for hours on a shoot in the local wildlife area. When I replace the 24-120 with the 24-70 on my D800 I frankly don’t even notice a difference. Unless a person has physical limittions, I see no reason to hesitate getting this fine pro quality lens. I know of fine pro women photographers, whose work I greatly admire, that use the 24-70 and consider it to be their workhorse lens. I am so glad I ignored the negative comments about weight and got this lens, which is now my favorite.
Vern Thank you so much for posting. I too own the 24-120 and have been considering getting the 24-70 G but couldn’t decide if it was worth it. Based on your comments and those of a few others I think I’m going to pull the trigger on a refurb 24-70 G direct from Nikon. Again thanks for adding your comment to this thread.
Siddhartan Selvarangan
October 9, 2017 6:40 pm
Your review is great and helps me understand it’s value. But I have a doubt. Compared to the 24-120 in sharpness it’s just a bit better or so. So I would like to know what the 24-70 can offer at greater apertures than the 24-120 since the performance seems to be just a step more. Build wise 24-70 is obviously better but because of my budget I am kinda stuck between these two lenses. Both seem to have nano crystal coating. Is the 24-120 weather sealed? Also is the 24-70 good enough without the VR?
Frank Millard
November 21, 2016 3:33 pm
when can we expect test of sigma 12-24 f/4 art? thank you
You are not alone:-) But, hey! Nasim wrote “I will post by the end of the week” (he didn’t mention exactly THIS weekend), so it will be published at any time of this year… But I hope we dont need to wait for testing another 4 samples to get the final conclusion:-)
Tom, I am still editing pictures for the review :( Was planning to post the review yesterday, but navigating through 5 thousand images and re-editing some of them is taking quite a bit of time. I have most of the review ready (all Imatest numbers are done), just need to get the images done. 5:05 AM and I haven’t slept yet. Please bear with me – I am doing my best.
Tom, it was a commitment and I feel ashamed that I could not do it. Just did not expect to be doing three reviews at once – that’s what took me the most time. Every review has comparisons and I do not want to confuse any readers with outdated / non-relevant information.
On the positive note, I had a lot done this weekend :) Again, thank you for your patience!
Also, please keep in mind that this one review is causing me to update many others – I updated the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC review this weekend and I have most of the 24-120mm f/4G VR review update done (working on images as well). So this is a massive undertaking, as I want all the data to look in sync between the different reviews, especially when it comes to lens comparisons.
Regis and Tom, thank you for your patience. if you would like some early conclusions without seeing the actual review – basically, do not trust sites like DPReview, DxO and others that said that the 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is a crap lens – they have no idea what they are talking about. The 24-70mm f/2.8E VR was modified optically to yield maximum sharpness across the frame, not just in the center like the old 24-70mm f/2.8G did. This meant that Nikon’s engineers had to make certain compromises in the optical design. As you know, the 24-70mm f/2.8E VR was optically not that much different compared to its predecessor, so there was no redesign of the lens – Nikon decided to address the field curvature issue differently, by borrowing sharpness from the center and spreading it towards the edges of the frame. This resulted in stellar mid-frame and corner performance, but at the expense of loss of resolution in the center. So optically, the new 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is not as sharp as its predecessor in the center, but it is a much more balanced lens across the frame in comparison. Which is exactly what landscape and architecture photographers need.
The 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is a stellar lens in terms of sharpness, probably one of the best on the market today (it beats the heck out of the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II in the edges). But those who are used to see insane center sharpness, particularly portrait photographers, will be disappointed. That’s because they won’t see the biting sharpness they are used to seeing in the eyes of their subjects. This is a non-issue for most people who will be using this lens, but if there are people who use the 24-70mm for portraiture, they are better off getting the older 24-70mm f/2.8G.
That’s a rough summary of the upcoming review.
Thank you for your patience and I apologize that it is taking me this long to write it!
Thank you Nasim, I was just joking and I share your conclusion as I have the VR version after the G version. I can work with both lenses, but the images in the new one are just amazing (well balanced around the frame & 3d rendition). I prefer this lense than primes…
Regis, the new 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is made to last on high-resolution cameras. Those who say bad things about it are not photographers. If they were, they would have put the lens side by side with any other 24-70mm and concluded that it is the sharpest of the bunch…
Thomas, thank you for your feedback and for asking a very important question. As I have pointed out before, the Imatest numbers have been drastically changed once I switched from converting RAW files in Lightroom to DCRaw conversion. Because of this, the scores are very different in some of the older reviews. I am in the process of updating the older reviews to reflect this change – the 24-120mm f/4G VR is being completely rewritten and hopefully I will post the review on the front page within the next few days. Please refer to comparisons in this review and not in the 24-120mm review directly, for now.
kers
November 19, 2016 5:44 am
Nasim, Very nice approach to first update this review and then do the review of the new VR lens. and Beautiful photographs! my compliments! not too saturated colours! Just on the edge of reality. Made with a D700 that tells us all the benefits of the ‘NEW’ are sometimes overstated.
That said i just ordered the new Sigma ART 85mm lens ; Sigma seems to put Japanese honour in their products; especially in this one.
Kers, thank you for your feedback! I loved my D700, probably shot more than any other DSLR camera I have used to date!
The Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art looks really good. Haven’t tested it yet, but perhaps later this year will get a chance to see how it does.
Jean Sinotte
November 18, 2016 3:06 pm
Hi Nasim.
l follow you since many years now. So l read that you gonna make a review of the new Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4E. I do a lot of studio work and l didn’t find any review that speak about the accuracy of the new lens. l mean not just if the lens is fast but if the autofocus hesitates in low light conditions. Like my AF-S 85mm f/1.8G, (on my D810 or D500) when the modeling lights are dim, the 85mm hesitates to do autofocus on eye before if settlers on an eye. So if you can check if that occur with this new 105mm or not.
Jean, I know exactly what you are saying in terms of AF hesitation in low light. All fast aperture SLR lenses are going to be challenging in this regard and the 105mm f/1.4E is not an exception – if you shoot in dim environments, it will be tough to shoot at the fastest aperture and nail focus all the time. So it is probably going to be fairly close to what you currently experience with the 85mm.
Thanks Nasim. I always reed all your reviews before deciding to get a new photo equipment. So l will wait for your review about this new 105mm f/1.4 before getting this lens. And sorry for my english, french is my first language !
André
November 18, 2016 10:49 am
A great lens, in the hand of an excellent photographer. Congratulations! What struck me most was the quality of the photographs … and for that to happen, someone is needed behind … Perfect Review, as always.
George
November 18, 2016 10:09 am
Oh Lord, Nasim, this was so useful. While I will never buy this lens ($$$$$$!!), I LOVED the little late-1990’s 24-70/2.8. It was far from the Michelangelo-level quality of this baby, but it was SO useful and had a lovely quality (I think I lucked into a great sample). But what I really wanted to comment about was the D700 with which you shot these gorgeous, stunning examples. I’ve been feeling that a D700 might be the best choice for a reasonably priced used full-frame camera for workaday portraits and school and church photography. I think you’ve made up my mind – thank you. Love your articles; the explanation of why digital SLR’s backfocus was wonderful – confirms my love of the little “outdated, under-featured” Nikon V1, an adorable camera that just does the job for me, especially with the STABILIZED 18-35mm equivalent lens. But…I digress.
It’s a great Lens for real, Nasim – but for myself, this 24-70 2.8G Nikkor is 1) really being over-priced, for what it is ( I am a 28-70 2.8 Nikon Owner),
and 2) It’s not *that* much better, vs. the former one.
A great review from you, like always. The only thing i didn’t like here – the Picture being made with your D3S – the greens are looking artificial, way overprocessed, as well as the rainbow, no offense.
Good Light!
I know this review was written some time ago, but I just recently bought the marvelous 24-70 G and it is everything that is said about it! I am totally impressed! Even though I already have the 24-120 f4, I find the 24-70 to be a much better lens. Build quality, image quality and fast f2.8 aperture make it a winner. I have read lots about its weight being so heavy. I was concerned about that but have found the concerns to be overblown! In fact, I was surprised to find that the lens was not heavy at all in my view, and I am a yongster of 81! But then I carry a D500 and big Sigma 150-600 C around for hours on a shoot in the local wildlife area. When I replace the 24-120 with the 24-70 on my D800 I frankly don’t even notice a difference. Unless a person has physical limittions, I see no reason to hesitate getting this fine pro quality lens. I know of fine pro women photographers, whose work I greatly admire, that use the 24-70 and consider it to be their workhorse lens. I am so glad I ignored the negative comments about weight and got this lens, which is now my favorite.
Best wishes, Vern
Vern
Thank you so much for posting. I too own the 24-120 and have been considering getting the 24-70 G but couldn’t decide if it was worth it. Based on your comments and those of a few others I think I’m going to pull the trigger on a refurb 24-70 G direct from Nikon. Again thanks for adding your comment to this thread.
Your review is great and helps me understand it’s value.
But I have a doubt.
Compared to the 24-120 in sharpness it’s just a bit better or so.
So I would like to know what the 24-70 can offer at greater apertures than the 24-120 since the performance seems to be just a step more.
Build wise 24-70 is obviously better but because of my budget I am kinda stuck between these two lenses.
Both seem to have nano crystal coating.
Is the 24-120 weather sealed?
Also is the 24-70 good enough without the VR?
when can we expect test of sigma 12-24 f/4 art?
thank you
So, VR or not VR version ?
It seems Nasim lives in unrecognizable timezone:-)
Have updated this page x30 last week-end ! My hand is now shaking ;-)
You are not alone:-)
But, hey! Nasim wrote “I will post by the end of the week” (he didn’t mention exactly THIS weekend), so it will be published at any time of this year…
But I hope we dont need to wait for testing another 4 samples to get the final conclusion:-)
Tom, I am still editing pictures for the review :( Was planning to post the review yesterday, but navigating through 5 thousand images and re-editing some of them is taking quite a bit of time. I have most of the review ready (all Imatest numbers are done), just need to get the images done. 5:05 AM and I haven’t slept yet. Please bear with me – I am doing my best.
I really like your reviews and I respect your effort.
I was joking.
Tom, it was a commitment and I feel ashamed that I could not do it. Just did not expect to be doing three reviews at once – that’s what took me the most time. Every review has comparisons and I do not want to confuse any readers with outdated / non-relevant information.
On the positive note, I had a lot done this weekend :) Again, thank you for your patience!
Also, please keep in mind that this one review is causing me to update many others – I updated the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC review this weekend and I have most of the 24-120mm f/4G VR review update done (working on images as well). So this is a massive undertaking, as I want all the data to look in sync between the different reviews, especially when it comes to lens comparisons.
Regis and Tom, thank you for your patience. if you would like some early conclusions without seeing the actual review – basically, do not trust sites like DPReview, DxO and others that said that the 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is a crap lens – they have no idea what they are talking about. The 24-70mm f/2.8E VR was modified optically to yield maximum sharpness across the frame, not just in the center like the old 24-70mm f/2.8G did. This meant that Nikon’s engineers had to make certain compromises in the optical design. As you know, the 24-70mm f/2.8E VR was optically not that much different compared to its predecessor, so there was no redesign of the lens – Nikon decided to address the field curvature issue differently, by borrowing sharpness from the center and spreading it towards the edges of the frame. This resulted in stellar mid-frame and corner performance, but at the expense of loss of resolution in the center. So optically, the new 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is not as sharp as its predecessor in the center, but it is a much more balanced lens across the frame in comparison. Which is exactly what landscape and architecture photographers need.
The 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is a stellar lens in terms of sharpness, probably one of the best on the market today (it beats the heck out of the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II in the edges). But those who are used to see insane center sharpness, particularly portrait photographers, will be disappointed. That’s because they won’t see the biting sharpness they are used to seeing in the eyes of their subjects. This is a non-issue for most people who will be using this lens, but if there are people who use the 24-70mm for portraiture, they are better off getting the older 24-70mm f/2.8G.
That’s a rough summary of the upcoming review.
Thank you for your patience and I apologize that it is taking me this long to write it!
Thank you Nasim, I was just joking and I share your conclusion as I have the VR version after the G version. I can work with both lenses, but the images in the new one are just amazing (well balanced around the frame & 3d rendition). I prefer this lense than primes…
Regis, the new 24-70mm f/2.8E VR is made to last on high-resolution cameras. Those who say bad things about it are not photographers. If they were, they would have put the lens side by side with any other 24-70mm and concluded that it is the sharpest of the bunch…
And some do not even have tested or touched it !
Thank you for your reviews for photographers.
Hello Nasim,
It appears that the Imatest scores of the 24-120 in this lens comparison are lower than those listed in the original 24-120 review. Can you explain?
Thanks
Thomas, thank you for your feedback and for asking a very important question. As I have pointed out before, the Imatest numbers have been drastically changed once I switched from converting RAW files in Lightroom to DCRaw conversion. Because of this, the scores are very different in some of the older reviews. I am in the process of updating the older reviews to reflect this change – the 24-120mm f/4G VR is being completely rewritten and hopefully I will post the review on the front page within the next few days. Please refer to comparisons in this review and not in the 24-120mm review directly, for now.
Nasim,
Very nice approach to first update this review and then do the review of the new VR lens.
and
Beautiful photographs! my compliments! not too saturated colours! Just on the edge of reality.
Made with a D700 that tells us all the benefits of the ‘NEW’ are sometimes overstated.
That said i just ordered the new Sigma ART 85mm lens ; Sigma seems to put Japanese honour in their products; especially in this one.
Kers, thank you for your feedback! I loved my D700, probably shot more than any other DSLR camera I have used to date!
The Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art looks really good. Haven’t tested it yet, but perhaps later this year will get a chance to see how it does.
Hi Nasim.
l follow you since many years now. So l read that you gonna make a review of the new Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4E. I do a lot of studio work and l didn’t find any review that speak about the accuracy of the new lens. l mean not just if the lens is fast but if the autofocus hesitates in low light conditions. Like my AF-S 85mm f/1.8G, (on my D810 or D500) when the modeling lights are dim, the 85mm hesitates to do autofocus on eye before if settlers on an eye. So if you can check if that occur with this new 105mm or not.
Thanks !!!
Jean, I know exactly what you are saying in terms of AF hesitation in low light. All fast aperture SLR lenses are going to be challenging in this regard and the 105mm f/1.4E is not an exception – if you shoot in dim environments, it will be tough to shoot at the fastest aperture and nail focus all the time. So it is probably going to be fairly close to what you currently experience with the 85mm.
Thanks Nasim. I always reed all your reviews before deciding to get a new photo equipment. So l will wait for your review about this new 105mm f/1.4 before getting this lens. And sorry for my english, french is my first language !
A great lens, in the hand of an excellent photographer.
Congratulations! What struck me most was the quality of the photographs … and for that to happen, someone is needed behind …
Perfect Review, as always.
Oh Lord, Nasim, this was so useful. While I will never buy this lens ($$$$$$!!), I LOVED the little late-1990’s 24-70/2.8. It was far from the Michelangelo-level quality of this baby, but it was SO useful and had a lovely quality (I think I lucked into a great sample). But what I really wanted to comment about was the D700 with which you shot these gorgeous, stunning examples. I’ve been feeling that a D700 might be the best choice for a reasonably priced used full-frame camera for workaday portraits and school and church photography. I think you’ve made up my mind – thank you. Love your articles; the explanation of why digital SLR’s backfocus was wonderful – confirms my love of the little “outdated, under-featured” Nikon V1, an adorable camera that just does the job for me, especially with the STABILIZED 18-35mm equivalent lens. But…I digress.