Summary: a professional looking lens.outstanding quality metal construction.saved,and waited for this lens a long time.it was going to be my all around most used keeper.then heartbreak!,soft at all settings,poor image quality with a d3.very dissapointed,im so sorry i sold the old 35-70 2.8d.
Summary: I bought this with unrealistic expectations, hoping it would be "almost as good as" the more expensive 24-70mm f/2.8. It's really not. I've found this to be an excellent lens in bright light only. In low light (I photograph a lot of musicians performing in theaters or clubs), it's only especially good at 24mm and f/2.8. The more you zoom, the less sharp the pictures are. Not a bad lens, but not a great one either.
Excerpt: I had this lens for a week and used it on my D700. I shot a few shoots with it and loved the lens' versatility, bokeh, etc until I pulled the photos up on my computer. There was severe distortion in the corners when pushed wide and significant chromatic aberration, especially in macro. I did not expect the macro quality of seperate 1: 1 macro lens, but I did expect more from Nikon.
Pros: Durable, Easily Interchangeable, Macro, Nice Bokeh, Strong Construction
Excerpt: I notice that much of the praise for this lens comes from people shooting DX Nikons, not FX, the format Nikon markets the lens for. In DX, results can look okay because the smaller DX sensor picks up only the middle 2/3 of the image, or the sweet spot, of the lens. On an FX camera, such as my D700, weaknesses of the lens make themselves painfully apparent in the form of distortion (barrel or pin cushion, depending on the focal length), fringing, soft edges, vignetting,...
Excerpt: I bought this lens about 8 months ago, and I am not happy with it. The images are not sharp enough, lens has a strong vignette in the corners at 24, focus is a little slow. I am returning it and spending the extra money on the 24-70 2.8.