Shuttergirl75 11:56pm, 19 February 2008
i mainly use prime lenses, but every once in a while, i need to use a zoom, for indoor portrait work.

i know there's the new 24-70 2.8, but would anyone recommend another lens less in price? i would use the lens maybe once or twice a month until spring. it'll mainly be used indoors, on a child or newborn w/ parent.

i'm having a hard time spending $1500 for a lens that i'll use a handful a time throughout the year. i rather shell out big money on upgrading my current prime lenses.

DGPhotography 10 years ago
You may want to check out for his suggested lenses that work well with the D3 .... good luck!

robphoto2008 PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by robphoto2008 (member) 10 years ago
$1500 is a lot of money, but then a D3 is a lot of camera. I had the same problem, and ended up buying the 24-70 2.8 and am really happy I did. I love the small dof I can get with 2.8 and shooting indoors in less than perfect light, you have more options. I posted a picture last night in this group, of a guitar shot at 6400 ISO, 1/60sec, handheld, at 2.8 with that lens. I needed 2.8 Good luck with your decision
t0ker 10 years ago
I have the 24-70mm f2.8, this is the best len in its class and even performs better than my 50mm f1.8 prime.

Awesome len, worth the money.

I just used it at a wedding in low light, got some great frames.
saronann Posted 10 years ago. Edited by saronann (member) 10 years ago
For mid-range zooms, take a look around for a 28-70 f2.8 Nikkor. They are still available and at a reduced price. This is a lens I use on my D3. I tried the newer 24-70 for about 10 days and could not justify replacing my 28-70mm. There just isn't any replacement for these.

However, for indoor portrait work, I would highly recommend an 85mm. I use an 85mm f2. I have used my 70-200 f2.8 Nikkor on several occasions and been quite happy with the results, but you can't get in close.
Tomisz 9 years ago
I have the nikkor 24-70 2.8 and i have to say that it is worth every cent! extremely fast, sharp (even wide open), great colors and contrast!
I was also thinking about Sigma 24-70 2.8. Sigma is also sharp, unfortunately noisy AF, no sealing.
Try to find somewhere nikkor 28-70 2.8 af-s. It is much better than sigma but discontinued:(

If i have to buy the 24-70 again, i would buy nikkor 24-70 2.8 af-s.
IanAWood 9 years ago
As well as the 24-70 I use the 20-35 f2.8 and 35-70 f2.8 lenses that I picked up for £400 each second hand. All three are great lenses and perform better than my 17-55 does on the D300 and that's no slouch!

When I am working indoors I tend to use a prime and zoom with my feet. For this I use my 20 f2.8, 35 f2, 50 f1.4 and 85 f1.4 all of which have better IQ than the zooms.
Phiggys PRO 9 years ago
Don,t dismiss the AFS 24-120 3.5-5.6 VR I have owned two of these but was recently persuaded by a friend to let one go it's a excellent general purpose lens at a 1/3rd of the price of the AFS 24-70mm f2.8 you can check out the images on my photostream or check ot the images on
most of her studio work is taken with this lens.
I also have a Tokina ATX 28-70mm f2.8 and the ATX28-80mm f2.8 both turning out excellent results at bargain prices used.
Gen Kanai 9 years ago
You can only find it used but the Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 IF-ED AF-S is a great mid-range zoom.
fabulous offer [deleted] 9 years ago
There is also a 24-85 2.8-4.0
jenerik images 9 years ago
I've got the 28-70mm f/2.8, a few years ago. At the time, it was the most expensive lens I'd ever bought, but it was, and still is, worth the investment. Even though the 24-70mm has replaced it, I wouldn't upgrade unless there was a significant price incentive -- the 28-70mm works that well for me.
Groups Beta