Would this be a great lens to have while shooting weddings with my D7100? cant really swing the 24-70 right now
824631
The 28-70 is really a great lens and its f/2.8 does well in low light found at weddings. It works well on the D7100 and will be great if you ever choose to move to a full frame camera. It is one of the heaviest lens made by Nikon.
824632
Hello scott I just bought it , 'cause i can`t afford the 24-70 too. The lense has an excellente construction, and it really sharp. The only thing I can tell you, is that is a HEAVY sense, I don't know if the 24-70 is lighter, but if you are gonna use it for several hours, have this in mind. I hope I could halp you, sorry my english.
824633
I find the 28 to 70 lens to be a really great lens, sharp, easy to use, fast focus but a bit heavy when used for an event such as weddings. I would recommend looking at 24 - 70mm lens by sigma.
824634
I own this lens and use it on my Nikon D600 I have have taken it all over the world. Its my favorite for portraits, weddings, and sports. Really you can't go wrong. Its tough, the glass is BEAUTIFUL and a lot cheaper then the over-rated 24-70. It is a bit heavy if you have not used a big lens like this. I have shoot 12 hour events and my shoulder gets sore. A wedding if very doable.
824635
Yes, definitively! A little narrower angle of view doesn't really make that much difference! I have used this lens for over two years and never think of switching it to 24-70!
824636
This is a very nice lens and will work very well for all of your shooting. Just understand, it will feel a bit heavy hanging around your neck. Though the quality of your photos will be worth it.
824637
Being that this lens was the lends to have before the 24-70 and used for fashion shows and pretty much everything, I think it'd be a smart buy. I bought one for concerts because of same reason, I can't afford the 24-70. I was very happy with the first concert I shot with it, using a D5100 no less. I recently also got a D7100 and feel it'll only improve things further. I've done a few other shoots with it as well. It's definitely worth having.
143452
It is a really nice lens. Though if you want portrait or medium telephoto, the 135 f/2 or the 70-200 f/2.8 are both fantastic as well, and maybe better suited.
1379524
I'm using it on my D7100 and it's a great lens. It is heavy but it's solid ~ I've taken it on a few trips now and I love it.
987396
I think it would be great on a D700 given it is a full frame sensor. It might be hard to keep moving children in sharp focus with the aperture wide open but if you do it will give great portraiture shots with a great bokeh effect. This is truly one of my favorite lens now even over my 70-200/2.8. It gives that professional look.
986588
I think it would be a good choice. I use it on a D-700 (full frame), and it's a nice sharp lens with minimal perspective distortion.
622757
I would not recommend. Its a portrait lens with a focal length designed for FX. The D7100 is DX, which makes the effective focal length over 200mm - too long in my opinion.
1674522
I bought the 24-105 lens recently because I thought the IS would make up for my lack of a higher aperture in low-light situations. It does to an extent, but I have decided that I want the f/2.8 for other reasons. So I'm trying to sell my 24-105 so I can buy the 24-70. I do wish the 24-70 had IS, but it's really not necessary because it's just a faster lens. It really depends on your use. If you are using it for weddings, you may want to consider the 24-70 because of the faster focusing and better handling in low-light situations. If you are using it for a general walk-around lens, the 24-105 will do just fine. I love mine and I almost want to keep it and buy the 24-70, but I can't afford both right now and I need the 24-70 for my business. You can see some sample photos from the 24-105 at my website: www.sarakelley.net. Email me there if you want more input or have any questions.
1111392
I own a D7100 and use 4 lens on it, The 18-300mm is a little heavy but it's a "Can Do" lens for most things. Add the 10-24mm and you can really open a lot of WIDE doors. The 50mm f/1.4G is Awesome at night, you won't believe how great your shoots are. I also have the 35mm, great for a light weight great shooting day. These 4 you won't miss anything.
730784
The reason i ask is D7100 is a 23.5 mm sensor and this lens is made for a 36mm sensor or a full frame sensor.. May be you should look at some DX sensors .. If you are inclined on this lens then i would suggest to save up a little more and get the D600 or D800... its definitely worth it and you will enjoy it a lot...just my suggestion.. :)
1345652
The 24-70 f2.8 is a better lens for sure, and much more expensive. But this lens is VERY good, and will do a fine job for weddings.
219910
Its a great lens but obviously very different from the 10-18mm f4. I use the 24mm Zeiss almost exclusively indoors because it gets me to an equivalent focal length close to 35mm and helps with low light because of the wide 1.8 aperture. It also gets the nice shallow depth of field with that wide aperture and nice bokeh. I would love to own the 10-18 f4 but it would really be for a totally different purpose - super wide outdoor landscapes. Also, it's a slower lens with that f4 aperture and won't get a shallow depth of field under really any circumstances.
1037163
I have to respectfully disagree with the recommendation for a 16-85mm VR. I have that lens, use it with my D90 and it's great for outdoor situations. Indoors, the 16-85mm is fine if you are using a flash. I can see using the 16-85mm for some interior church shots, but most of wedding shots are going to be of people. things, little details like bouquets, etc. You will want a lens that can handle low-light and can isolate a subject well (subject in focus - remaining areas blurry). You should check out primes. Fast zooms are nice, but they will defintiley set you back a lot of money. Look into these lenses: 1. Nikkor 50mm 1.8 - The poor man's lens for low light, decent bokeh, depth of field interestingness. $100 Everyone should have at least one fast lens and since this one is cheap, it's a good place to start. 2. Sigma 30mm 1.4 More money, but since it's wider than the above lens, a little more versatile, especially with DX sensor. $300 or more 3. Nikkor 85mm 1.8 - Like the 50mm but is more telephoto, so this is good if you are standing far from your subject but want to fill the frame with your subject. Good for concerts, theater, etc. 5. Nikkor 85mm 1.4 - This is a money-making lens for pro wedding photographers and portrait photographers. People fall in love with and worship this lens. Do a web search and you'll find out why. Very, very pricey. $1K but worth it. One thing about primes is that there is a definite learning curve to using them - especially at the wider apertures since the depth of field is SO narrow. You have to really work on learning to use them to maximize the number of keepers you have. BUT, these fast lenses help you to examine more work more critically, to look at your composition, technique, etc in ways that your kit lens never will :) Good luck with your photography!
1922050
The Nikon Version of this lens will work fine with a D7100... keep in mind the crop factor actually makes this lens a little longer than 70 - 300mm This will have more reach than the Nikon 55-200mm but not necessarily any more image quality, but not necessarily any less either. I hope this answers your question. I have this lens in Canon and I like it very well. Here is an image on my website that was taken with this lens. notice below the image is the EXIF info from the image, take a glance. http://1shutterbug.com/who-are-you-what-are-you-doing/
1549361
I use this lens mainly for taking macro pictures of flowers etc with both my Nikon D90 and D7000. I have taken pictures in low light situations and have had noproblem. If I were to take pictures in dance performances though I probably would choose say the Nikon 85mm f/1.8 lens where macro would not necessarily be the issue.Hope this is some help to you.
1864134
It's perfect for that. It covers the D800 full frame and I've heard people refer to it as "the wedding lens". I don't do weddings on a regular basis, but when I shot my niece's wedding recently, I used this lens almost exclusively.
357723
I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it.... » Read More I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. « Show Less
933399
This is one of the best lenses I have ever owned. I am not sure about the 35-70 2.8 version because there is no macro application on the 24-70. I use this lens for both fx and dx cameras how ever I would assume that it is a little sharper than the 35-70 due to the fact that it is newer technology. I can't find any current reviews for your lens. I agree with Marty in LA, buy the Nikon 105mm or 200mm if you want macro and if you need a versatile wide angle buy the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 in either F2.8 or F4...