09-03-2010, 04:47 PM
[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1283530809' post='2461']
Markus, according to the photographer/salesman whos tries to sell me this lens, it is a predecessor to the 2,8 24-70. I don't think I can do much wrong by buying it at that price until I find the right lenses.
[/quote]
Well, that is a creative way to put it <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Seriously: yes, the 35-70/2.8 was Nikon's fast standard zoom in the 90s. That part is now played by the 24-70. However, if we're talking about predecessors, there is only one to the 24-70 IMO: the AF-S 28-70/2.8.
Don't expect wonders from the 35-70. Price seems to be ok and in line with other offerings I've seen. But IMO you'd be way better off with a AF-S DX 16-85 VR (if you decide to get the D300s). Not that fast, sure, but optically certainly superior and a lot larger focal range (especially at the short end). Sells for around 460 EUR in the Netherlands.
-- Markus
Markus, according to the photographer/salesman whos tries to sell me this lens, it is a predecessor to the 2,8 24-70. I don't think I can do much wrong by buying it at that price until I find the right lenses.
[/quote]
Well, that is a creative way to put it <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />Seriously: yes, the 35-70/2.8 was Nikon's fast standard zoom in the 90s. That part is now played by the 24-70. However, if we're talking about predecessors, there is only one to the 24-70 IMO: the AF-S 28-70/2.8.
Don't expect wonders from the 35-70. Price seems to be ok and in line with other offerings I've seen. But IMO you'd be way better off with a AF-S DX 16-85 VR (if you decide to get the D300s). Not that fast, sure, but optically certainly superior and a lot larger focal range (especially at the short end). Sells for around 460 EUR in the Netherlands.
-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
opticallimits.com