24-70 2.8 vs. 28-70 2.8

[Joseph Ramos]

Is there a difference between these lenses other than 24 being slightly wider?
Thanks

 

[vieri]

Is there a difference between these lenses other than 24 being slightly wider?
Thanks

Yes there is - new optical formula, new coating (Nano-coating). Other than that, the 28-70 is a stellar performer, I had it and loved it, but I am just a prime guy so I got to sell it...

The new 24-70 is supposed to be even better, so I am quite sure you can't go wrong with either.

 

[Joseph Ramos]

Thank You for your reply. I am torn because I can pick up a 28-70 used for $1100 or buy the 24-70 new. I cant make up my mind.

 

[harmsr]

Joseph,

If you can afford the price difference go for the new 24-70. It really is a complete new generation of zoom lens.

If not, the 28-70 is still a good lens. However, the 24-70 is a much better lens.

Best,

Ray

 

[Joseph Ramos]

Does anyone have both of these lenses and been able to do a comparison.Thanks

 

[ptomsu]

I have the 28-70 and this is one of the best lenses Nikon ever built. But I would go for the 24-70 if I had the choice and start from scratch! The 24-70 is the latest generation and using Nanocoating and this is something which only can make it better.

 

[S.P.]

I got my AF-S 24-70/2.8 yesterday. First test of the new lens was assignment for James Blunt live-shots.

The lens is sharper than the AF-S 28-70/2.8 and has absolutely no problems with flare. The new Nano-Coating is really great!

Nikon D3 - AF-S 24-70/2.8 @ 38mm - ISO 1600 - f3,2 1/80s

The AF-S 28-70/2.8 has more problems with flare and the AF-S 17-55/2.8DX is worse in this point!

Nikon D3 - AF-S 28-70/2.8 @ 28mm - ISO 5000 - f3,5 1/60s

Nikon D2X - AF-S 17-55/2.8DX

Stefan

 

[ptomsu]

Yes, the Nanocoating really does a great job, I know this from my 105/VR :angel:

 

[woodyspedden]

Flare performance is better with the 24-70 and I owned both. Other than that the 28-70 is a very good performer so if budget is an issue you won't be disappointed.

woody