p.3 #9 · Nikon 24-70 2.8 Z vs Nikon 24-70 2.8 Z II Optically the same?
adakshi wrote:
Lol. These two are so close, basically splitting hairs, except the weight
And I think that it's objective achieved. I would postulate that Nikon didn't really want it to be specifically different/better, I believe their aim was more the mechanical side of things - AF speed (more aimed at later bodies that will benefit from the new AF), lower weight, filter window, clickable control ring. It was not necessarily to attract those that already had the Z 24-70 f2.8 V I (but if those that had version 1 want to upgrade then great) but just as a refurbishment for the advantages I listed for those that are freshly buying a 24-70 f2.8 or buying into the Z system.
p.3 #10 · Nikon 24-70 2.8 Z vs Nikon 24-70 2.8 Z II Optically the same?
Exactly.
I didn't have v1 of the 24-70 f/2.8 so it was a no brainer buying v2. Weight saving, the shade opening were nice but internal zoom action was a major improvements.
It's another story regarding the 70-200 f/2.8... I already own v1.The v2 weight saving and shade opening are tempting but the price to move up is pretty steep for no optical improvement.
