how does this nikon lens, differ from the previous nikon 35-70 2.8 macro version, and does this newer entry have macro as well??
933395
the biggest advantage is obviously the ability to go wide during weddings etc without missing shots or having to switch lenses. The 24mm is crisp throughout vs the softer edges in the older lens. I've also heard of some quality issues on the older lenses as well. The 35-70 won't auto focus with all cameras, depending on what you carry. Hope this helps.
933396
The main difference on the 24-70 2.8 will be the 24mm setting compared to the 35mm setting on the old lens. You can take a much wider shot with the new lens. In addition, the 24-70 is a "G" type lens which means there is no aperture ring on the lens. Aperture must be controlled through a compatible camera. The 24-70 2.8 is more expensive. The macro focusing gets a little closer on the 35-70 (.91ft) as opposed to 1.2 ft with the 24-70.
933397
This gold ring lens goes much wider, noticeably wider to the 24mm end. Must have a body which can set aperture since this lens has no aperture ring. No macro ability, but will shoot fairly close.
933398
This lens does not have macro, or what Nikon labels "micro" focusing capability. I will say, though, that the 24-70/2.8 takes such beautiful images that it stays on my camera about 80-90% of the time. Check out the 105/2.8 "micro-Nikkor" lens for macro as well as good portrait alternative.
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...
933400
The lens is not a macro lens. It is a very good lens - expensive glass and worth it. My second favorite lens after the Nikon 70-200mm 2.8.
933401
Many lenses are described as having "macro" capabilities, but this only refers to their close-focus distance and magnification. A true macro has 1:1 magnification; the 35-70 was 1:5.6, and the 24-70 is a little better at 1:3.7, but neither are true macros.
176052
Get the version with a built in focus motor unless you like manual focus all the time. This one's better: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro Motorized Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon SLR Cameras
2014190
I just bought this for my D80. It works perfectly fine. If you zoom in to the max then the built-in flash will cast a shadow (the lens itself is in the way) because you are so close to the object, in that case you need external lighting. No other 'issues' (this will happen regardless of what macrolens you use, so it isnt really an issue) that I have seen, great lens.
918494
No, this lens is not a macro lens. However, it is very good lens that produces sharp images.
1483057
YES...... I would highly recommend this lens and it is now used as my general lens of choice. To use the macro, it is necessary to stand back further than most lenses but it still produces a very crisp image. The weight of the lens helps to keep the camera steady as it is weighted well making the whole unit more sturdy. So far I have no regrets.
354495
Yes! It has a macro feature. This is an all-in-one lens that createsamazing photos!
1723190
I think it does. I have the first version on my D7000 and even though it was used when purchased I've not been dissapointed with it. It's a great zoom and wide angle lens. I've found too that the subject isolation at 200 is pretty good as well. Not great for low light without a flash but otherwise I've enjoyed mine.
1356282
It doesn't get super close, but it's really damn sharp. If you want to get closer, I'd suggest Sigma's 28mm f1.8 macro (they also have a 24, a 50, etc.)The macros are reviewed well enough, may not be as optimal in the corners, but for center-frame macro shots, everything else will be bokeh-d out anyway. This is more of a perfect travel lens- sharp as anything corner to corner for the landscape shots, and wide f1.8 for the people shots, while still being practical and relatively distortion-free.
19332
Thirding the question. Is there any new element and is the optical quality the same? How would a better lens be cheaper than the previous version?
659561
I would suggest getting the 105 mm macro if you want a true macro for closeup photography with any Nikon camera. I've used this lens for four years and have been extremely satisfied with sharpness and bokeh. At extreme macro settings, autofocus should be turned off, as it has difficulty searching for focal points. A 1:1 macro ratio is achieved when end of lens is approximately 5 1/2 inches from the subject.
2024381
I don't have both for a one on one comparison of the image quality, but the 35mm f2.8 macro generally has slightly better ratings. Check out the reviews on the Pentax Forums web site. The main reason I purchased it was for the macro capability. It also has metal vs plastic housing which may or may not be an issue depending on how you use it.
1251771
i bought that lens for my d7000 and had great success with it . i gave my daughter the camera and lens and since have bought the d800 and liked the lens so much i bought it again for that camera . with that said i recently sold that lens and am in the process of getting the newest nikon lens the 80-400mm . to sum up my reply great lens but its my understanding that because of the wide range the sensor area is always affected but should work fine when used on your d700...i believe this lens is a great buy
1380700
It is a new design that is smaller and lighter. Some might argue that the older design is a little sharper, but I am satisfied with the newer design as an "all purpose travel lens". For critical work, I would use my 70-200.
2017016
This will work with any Nikon lens. The thing you need to remember is that the magnification will be greater (closer) at 70 mm less at 300 mm. The best lens to use are 90 mm macro, 105 mm macro, 50 mm macro or standard all the way down to 24 mm. A 24 mm will give you the greatest magnification, but no matter which lens you use you will get close than that lens minimum focusing distance. Also remember you will not be able to focus to infinity. You will be restricted in your minimum and maximum working distances.
916596
I attached my macro lens to my Nikon kit 18-55mm lens. Just be sure to remove any filters you have on the lens first, otherwise the macro won't be able to attach. I think this is why the lenses are so cheap. You're getting the heavy duty lens functions (like autofocus, etc) from your primary lens, then the macro is just a fun add-on. If you only want a macro without having to attach it to another lens, you have to pay a lot more. I'm sure you also get more quality out of it, but given the price of this lens, you can still get some amazing pictures out of it.
2162151
NO, but for me this is a great lens and less than half the price of the 70-200 2.8, use on D-800. I like shooting concerts and use this lens a lot when I want to get close up shots of musicians from a distance or my Nikon 24-85 2.8-4D also an older lens but gives me great results. Just Me.
726798
Macro lenses are by design usually better than most prime lenses. In this case my Nikon 40mm will out preform most of my very expensive primes. And yes they carry this performance to any distance.And contrary to the other commentary it will focus accurately at any distance including infinity. I know because I use it thus many times a week.