Lens to get with D600?

I'm currently thinking about getting a d600 with a tamron 24-70 as a walkaround lens. And later buy a 16-35 and a tele zoom when I can afford it. Some praise it i hear, some say I should buy nikon's 24-70.So, which one? The tamron has vc/vr. The nikon don't, but do I really need it?

Added (1). The Tamron 24-70 is almost as expensive as nikon's 24-70, wouldn't call it cheap.

I would not buy a Tamron lens on the D600.

You are spending tons of money on the D600, so why ruin the camera's capability with a cheap lens. If you can't afford much of a lens, buy the Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.8 to start with ($200).It has excellent optics and will get you buy until you can buy additional lenses.

The 24-70 mm f/2.8 is one of the lenses we use to shoot fashion and some sports (from the baseline of a basketball court.

Frankly, if you have the skills, you do not need VR with such a lens. After all, we have been shooting without VR for over 60 years.

Look on page 37 of your user manual once you get the camera and see how you need to hold the camera so that it has less of a chance of moving during the exposure. In addition, until your have your skills hand holding a camera, make sure that you use shutter speeds of 1/250th second or faster

Many of the lenses I own have VR, but I rarely use it. Here is a shot taken with a 300 mm f/2.8 with the VR shut off.html? Sort=3&o=14

I use a monopod when using long lenses like the 300 mm f/2.8

EDIT

While the Nikkor 50 mm f/1.4 lens is a favorite lens used by those who shoot portraits using an ASP-C sensored camera, if you intend to buy a portrait lens, you will need the 85 mm f/1.8 on your full frame D600

Tamron is third-party and isn't really know for quality lenses. They may have accidentally make a great one in the 24-70mm if lots of people praise it. I personally would only get a Tamron if it's cheap. If you can afford the Nikon, the one with VR, then go for it. Why? Absolute worry-free compatibility. The bonus part is still superior optics over most third-party brands. If you are sold with the Tamron then why not?

The Tamron 24-70mm is a good performer compared to a lot of other Tamron lenses. But the Nikon is still significantly sharper.

Lots of photographers get really uptight about sharpness (I'm one of them, actually), but the truth is, it's not all that important for a lot of casual photographers. If you never plan on printing big, then your digitally-printed 8x10 is going to look just as sharp whether you shoot it with a Nikon 18-55mm, a Tamron 17-50mm, or a Ziess Distagon T* 21mm f/2.8.

That being said, if you want to print big and not be disappointed by a "soft" looking print, spend the money to get the best glass available. Tamron isn't bad, but it's not the best.

I have never had any good luck with tamron or sigma lenses; as they are not sharp. Plus, after a few years they don't hold their value as well as Nikon lenses. I brought a Nikon 28-105mm zoom which I'm very happy with for my future purchase of a Nikon FX body. I'm currently use it on my D300s. Good Nikon lenses I would consider are 24-70, 24-85 (all three versions), 28-105, 28-70, 28-85, 35-70 f2.8. 24-120 f4 VR. Most of these lenses don't have VR. I own two lenses with VR and about a dozen lenses without VR and I don't think it is a necessity for a lens to have it if you have good camera technique.