64 of 67 people found the following review helpful
This lens is a winner,
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED Vibration Reduction Zoom Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras (Electronics)
I was like many folks who wanted a good mid range zoom for the newest breed of Nikon FX cameras but felt the 24-70 to expensive,big and no VR, the 24-120 overpriced relative to the expected quality, and the remaining kit lenses not up to current standards. I have the D800 and thought I would give the 24-85 a test. I am so glad I did. I already owned the 24mm f2.8 prime, the 50 mm f1.8 prime, the 14-24 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 so I did some sharpness tests using all of the above.
The results were surprising to say the least.
At 24mm focal length, this lens out performed the 14-24 and the 24mm F2.8 in the center and in the corners. The 24-85 was sharp in the center at F4 and by F8 the corners also became sharp. Yes, this lens has barrel distortion but that can be corrected for. Very low CA's, and not much flare. Color saturation very good as well.
At 50mm focal length this lens performed very well against the 50mm f1.8. Though not ever quite catching up to this prime lens, by f8 it got very close.
At 70mm performance was down when compared to the 70-200 F2.8 but still pretty good considering the price difference between this lens and the 70-200. If you are careful in setting your aperture, you will get very sharp results with the D800. Adding the VR into the mix makes this lens a keeper. I will be selling the 24mm F2.8 on Ebay!
I travel extensively, and the light weight of this lens will be greatly appreciated. The VR will more than make up for the smaller apertures and frankly, large apertures are far more useful on telephoto lenses where backgrounds often need to be out of focus. I never saw a great need for f2.8 on wide angle lenses. My experience says go for VR to get sharper photos under trying conditions.
Sharpness is the one thing you cannot fix in post processing. Get this lens!
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Sep 8, 2012 11:33:48 AM PDT
J. COLLETTE says:
great,and informative review...
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2014 6:23:16 AM PST
Ruby Jane says:
I was wondering if the bokeh is good....creamy or not existent.
Posted on May 7, 2015 11:22:29 PM PDT
SELENE AGUILAR says:
Hi i have a nikon d3100, im not an expert i used my camera for pictures of centerpieces of weddings and i need to cover aspects of the weddings. I have a 35mm f1.8 that works perfectly to shot centerpieces But Do you think this lens could help me with my other issue to shot the first dance at a long distance does the zoom has a good range? 24-70 is too expensive, so i was thinking to by this option.
Nice review btw....Thank you for the sincerely answer
In reply to an earlier post on May 8, 2015 9:53:26 AM PDT
This lens works well on DX cameras such as yours as the areas that are less sharp are in the corners of the FX frame and you will not see that on your camera. This lens is also relatively light. That said, you will have to realize that with an Aperture max of 3.5 to 4.5 you will not have as good a results in low lighting conditions. If you want an alternative, the 16-85 DX lens is a good one. It goes wider and is almost as sharp as the 24-85 lens. Bear in mind that no zoom lens, including the 24-70 F2.8 (no image stabilization!), is going to equal the quality of a prime lens such as the 35mm F1.8.
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 5, 2015 11:38:23 AM PST
You can not beat prime lens like 35mm, 50mm, 85mm for picture quality color rendering.
For low light conditions, they are best. However for event photography, which demands zooms.
Look 24-70 and 70-200 2.8f lens. They are heavy and costly compared to primes. They are best zooms can get as good as prime quality pictures.
If you looking for little less money check Tamron/Sigma zooms. I am not event photographer. I use Tamron 28-75 f2.8 for all my family events. Always happy. I perfer to shoot RAW and then edit on light room. Shooting jpgs, no .. no.. for me.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›