Rather than a 35-70, why not consider the AF-S 28-70 f2.8, it is a great lens and a more modern design?

GeoffRG wrote:Rather than a 35-70, why not consider the AF-S 28-70 f2.8, it is a great lens and a more modern design?AFAIK this lens is known for developing problems with the AF motor. Is the spare part still available?

You can't officially pin down what Nikon has to say about this, they'll just say send it in and we'll see.   But in reality it becomes less and less likely parts are available.I've come to believe that especially early gen AFS lenses need to be exercised frequently or oxidation occurs on their surfaces leading them to freeze.I had a 28-70 2.8 which ended up being my least used lens by a lot, I owned it from 2003- 2013.   I may have only used it once or twice that entire time.  When I picked it up at the end it was not working.  I sent it in got it fixed, bought a 24-120/4, liked that lens enough that when I got the 28-70 back I sold it.I believe that used prices for the 28-70/2.8 are fair ( under 400 dollars ).  I bought a 200-400 /4 afs for 700 dollars and a 300/2.8 II for 350 dollars(!!), with squeaky motors.Now it's a little annoying but at least once a week I put those lenses on bodies, move the AF back and forth a dozen or so times and focus them.   The squeaks (if they represent anything) don't happen.

Swimming and Baseball Dad wrote:A little update:I'm shooting a big swim meet this weekend. I'm going to borrow a friend's D3400 to have as a 2nd body, putting my 35/1.8 on it (to mimic FOV of a FF 50mm). This body is for non-action candid shots, posed portraits (w/ some fill-flash), etc.Main thing I want to test is whether having (2) bodies at an event like this is worth it, or will carrying it around be more trouble than its worth. Is having it (but not carry around) worth it so I don't have to change lenses? This can only be answered by trying it out.I'll be at a huge aquatic center with 150-200 swimmers, coaches, and officials all trying to do their job. I'll be staying out of their way while moving around a lot on a wet/slippery floor. The one thing that'll be much nicer than other pools I've shot at this season is the light. This place has really good light.The answer of why not another D500 or D7000-series is because for other portrait work (which I've been doing w/ D500+35/1.8), I'd like to pair my 50/1.4 and use the full frame. Since I can get closer, not needing my external flash (and making sure batteries are charged) is also rather convenient.Wanted to give an update.  The D3400 was good to have for this particular meet for awards/medals that occurred in between events, so switching lenses on my D500 wasn't necessary.  Having another body hanging off me as I was going around near the water or snaking through the crowd would not have worked well.  I think the D600/610 will be a good investment and I'll pair it with the 50/1.4 for now.  It will handle mostly still subjects, but gotta have the D500 for the action.