# New Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 IS is *less* sharp than prior (non-IS) version?



## ahsanford (Dec 4, 2015)

I'm loathe to link DXO lens reviews here, but I found this interesting:

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/AF-S-Nikkor-24-70mm-f-2.8E-ED-VR-Review-Updated-Nikon-standard-zoom-for-press-weddings-portraits-and-events/Nikon-24-70mm-f-2.8E-vs-Nikon-24-70mm-f-2.8G

Uncle Rog at LR also looked at the old and new Nikon 24-70 versions and flagged that at 24 and 50mm, Nikon appears to have deprioritized center sharpness to improve corner sharpness:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/nikon-24-70mm-f2-8-ed-af-s-vr-sharpness-optical-bench-testing

Fascinating. Though it's not exactly what was reported, would you trade a 10% reduction in center sharpness for a 25% improvement in corner sharpness? (I imagine the answer varies on what you are shooting...)

- A


----------



## TeT (Dec 4, 2015)

Reading some older posts on this subject (lens rental tests) it was made that way. DxO probably got this one right because they found it in print...

It is better sharpness across the full range giving up center sharpness to the old 24 70


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 4, 2015)

My old one had a ton of CA's, otherwise it was sharp. DXO sharpness measures are based on center sharpness.


----------



## K (Jan 9, 2016)

It depends. I wouldn't trade center sharpness for corners...but on my L glass, the corners aren't that bad. 

The old Nikon 24-70 has fairly crappy edge clarity with bad chromatics. The center is ok.

I guess I'm spoiled by my Canon 24-70 II

I don't see the 24-70 as a landscape lens, studio lens, or anything where the entire frame needs to be as crisp as possible. This thing is a general purpose zoom, and a wedding photographer's workhorse. The ultimate people event lens. For that, you don't need razor sharp corners.

However, because the Canon is so sharp and has good contrast - it is good enough to do some landscape and studio shots. Certainly, specialty primes are better - but this thing is close enough. It does replace several primes though.

Nikon's isn't good enough to allow one to tinker seriously beyond what a 24-70 used to do. The Canon version is good enough to make you think twice about buying a prime for clarity. It makes primes useful only for their wider apertures. 

Unfortunate that Nikon gave up center sharpness to fix the horrible edges. Maybe it was to also keep costs down with the VR? I can certainly see a Canon 24-70 IS hitting near $3K.


----------

