Mon 18-Feb-13 12:43 AM | edited Mon 18-Feb-13 12:44 AM by ajdooley
Shane -- Concerning the 24-70mm f2.8:
I shoot with two D700 bodies and one is more or less permanently mated to that lens. A considerable portion of my work is aerial photography, and my previous lens in that range was an older 24-120. It worked pretty well with a DX sensor D200, but when I added the size of the FX sensor to the equation, it wasn't sharp enough on the edges and especially the corners. I also do a lot of event and sports photography, so the f2.8 aperture is valuable. While the new 24-120 f4 has VR, that only helps you hand hold slower shutter speeds. The 24-70 gives you one more f/stop for stopping action. The 24-120 is not cheapy either. So if you can swing the rest of the cost, I think you'll be happy with the 24-70. I guess the 24-120 would be a better "walk around" lens, but I reach the rest of the range by having the 70-200 f2.8 VR II. The only other "con" for the 24-70 is its weight, but you look to be more my size, and at age 68 I am able to haul it for protracted periods. The 24-70 is one of the three pro lenses I have, and it is super. Again -- that's the lens that is "resident" on my one D700. The other one gets the other lenses.