24-70mm F2.8G nikkor

[V-man]

Hi everyone there is a Guy in England who will sell me his 24-70mm Nikkor. he wants to sell it through isold it .
I haven't had anything to do with the company - i sold it . He said it would come from England and i would have 5 days to check the lens out.
Has anyone delt with this company?. Or Should i stay clear?
John

[chrisk]

i'll be selling mine soon if that makes any difference to you.

[aim54x]

Any reason why you are selling?

[chrisk]

cos i dont like shooting with it.

[DanW]

cos i dont like shooting with it.

Any particular reason? If V-man isn't interested, I'd be. I can't afford new so have been looking for a good second hand copy.

What's the condition of the lens and what price are you thinking?

[chrisk]

its too awkward and heavy and it doesnt suit the way i shoot. just personal preference.
the lens is mint, always had a filter, aussie stock, all packaging etc. but it wont be a "bargain" so to speak. it'll be a fair deal for a near new lens. i cant sell it for a few weeks yet cos i have a some shoots over the coming weekends. not really 100% sure what i'll sell it for, will have to check up what they cost new. PMme if youre interested.

sorry to hijack the thread.

[Geoff]

its too awkward and heavy and it doesnt suit the way i shoot. just personal preference.
the lens is mint, always had a filter, aussie stock, all packaging etc. but it wont be a "bargain" so to speak. it'll be a fair deal for a near new lens. i cant sell it for a few weeks yet cos i have a some shoots over the coming weekends. not really 100% sure what i'll sell it for, will have to check up what they cost new. PMme if youre interested.

sorry to hijack the thread.

Hi Chris,

This is surprising...I'm wondering what (if anything) you'll replace it with?
I also know someone who may be interested in buying this lens so if DanW doesn't take it, let me know.

[chrisk]

I'm wondering what (if anything) you'll replace it with?

well, i've been saving everything i've made from photography for about a year now to get into FF. the way things are going, unless nikon deliver the goods, it appears that i will be replacing it, (and the 14-24, 35/2, 50/1.4G), with a 17-40/4L, 35/1.4L and 50/1.4USM.

[Geoff]

I'm wondering what (if anything) you'll replace it with?

well, i've been saving everything i've made from photography for about a year now to get into FF. the way things are going, unless nikon deliver the goods, it appears that i will be replacing it, (and the 14-24, 35/2, 50/1.4G), with a 17-40/4L, 35/1.4L and 50/1.4USM.

Which body mate?

[chrisk]

I'm wondering what (if anything) you'll replace it with?

well, i've been saving everything i've made from photography for about a year now to get into FF. the way things are going, unless nikon deliver the goods, it appears that i will be replacing it, (and the 14-24, 35/2, 50/1.4G), with a 17-40/4L, 35/1.4L and 50/1.4USM.

Which body mate?

MkII. i've been using one on and off for a while now. wish i could get hold of one for a week and take it home though.
+keep the d300 or all my macro and tele work.

[gstark]

Which body mate?

MkII. i've been using one on and off for a while now. wish i could get hold of one for a week and take it home though.
+keep the d300 or all my macro and tele work.

Why the MkII and not the D700?

The D700 eats the MkII at the high ISO end (the MkII's high ISO seems to be there because they can put it there: our tests were that it's about as usable as 12800 on a D70) and it's a much higher performance body.

The differences in resolution is not that much of an issue, as you know.

Is the video an issue for you? As much as we enjoyed the Mk II (and could gladly see one living here), given your investment in Nikkor glass, this would Shirley be the more logical choice?

[chrisk]

Why the MkII and not the D700?

The D700 eats the MkII at the high ISO end (the MkII's high ISO seems to be there because they can put it there: our tests were that it's about as usable as 12800 on a D70) and it's a much higher performance body. The differences in resolution is not that much of an issue, as you know.

Is the video an issue for you? As much as we enjoyed the Mk II (and could gladly see one living here), given your investment in Nikkor glass, this would Shirley be the more logical choice?

gary, i agree with everything you just said. yes, it absoletly would make more sense.

i only have a passing interest in video and the MkII video AF is shithouse, nor does it have an articualting screen so to me cideo riht now is only half baked. the resolution isnt a deal breaker either. i much prefer the d700 body and have found using the MkII awkward at worst and bearable at best, (although i;'ve really gotten used to the wheel).

unfortuantely though, there are a couple of pieces of glass i really want that nikon doesnt have which is why i'm looking at canon. i really hope they give us a couple of em by the end of the year cos i love shooting with the nikon bodies. hell, even if they just give me a 35/1.4G AFS IF...i;'ll be over the moon.

RE: the nvestment in glass. all are perfect and i'll get excellent resale for the 14-24 and 24-70. buying them and then selling is a much cheaper option than renting !! basically i'll end up having used them for a year for around a dollar a day. the 50/1.4 i'll probably sell for more than i bought it given the price rises !! my strobes will all work with alienbees or PW's so they're fine too.