[konastab01]

I have around a Grand to spend on one lense,What would you recon would be best for all round until I can afford the other.
So its eithera
Nikon 24-70 f2.8 or
Nikon 70-200 f2.8
I mainly shoot sports,a bit of portrait,Some night time stuff and am trying to get into concert photography.
At present I have a 50 f1.4
55-200vr
18-55 kit lense dont really use it though.
Cheers

[Yandros]

I think you've answered your own question. If you don't use the 18-55, then the 24-70 won't be so much use. I'd say the 70-200VR. Btw, there is a rumour of an update, as it's apparently not quite as good on FF as it is on DX.

[konastab01]

I will get the other one at some point.
I have the 50 for gigs/lowlight stuff and at some point I will get the other.

Yandros do you recon its worth waiting or buy the exsiting model the now?

[Yandros]

This might interest you...

Thom Hogan’s 2009 Nikon predictions | Nikon Rumors

I assume if you're looking at the 24-70, you're planning on going full frame at some point, in which case it might make sense to wait for the 70-200VR update.

[gunther1966]

Hi,

Everyone seems to be predicting a new version of the 70-200mm to be launched by the end of the year (possibly before the end of November) due to the poorer performance in terms of vignetting of the existing model on full frame cameras.

If you want this lens, and can wait, you may find a reduction in the new price starts to appear and that alot of secondhand ones start to appear at more reasonable prices.

Like the other contributors have said, you seem to have answered your own question, and the 70-200mm seems like the lens for you.

[RobDickinson]

Sigma 70-200f2.8 and sigma 24-70f2.8

[Radiohead]

I doubt we'll see a new 70-200 this year to be honest, and the economy could slow any new releases now. The existing one - it vignettes a little at 200mm and wide-open but this isn't a new thing. It's a FF thing.

The current one remains a superb lens:

[TarMoo]

For portraits ....

In a studio, you might prefer a 24-70, especially for full body shots.

The 70-200 VR is very good at portraits, so long as you have the space. The bokeh for the 70-200VR is very good.

I too was weighing up the purchase of the 27-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 VR and I am glad I chose the 70-200VR. I needed to get a bigger camera bag to hold the D300 with 70-200 attached (Kata R102). The 70-200 is very heavy, so is not ideal as a walkabout lens. The 70-200 is good for sports and for "zoo" type shots. e.g.

[konastab01]

I will hold off till after christmas(Depends on if I have any money left after this recession malary)
Price should be ablout the same for a new one,so I would rather have the newer one than the old one.
Its only just over a month,so we shall see.
I have the money sitting,so its sort of burning a massive hole in my pocket.

I will just keep using my 50 for the low light.

Yandros I am going to buy a full frame at some point when I can afford that.
D3x sounds good