nikon 75-150 f/3.5 series E

[tdoan]

A little preface:  I am just starting out with Nikon dslr, coming from Canon.  With my d7200, I'm looking for something like my canon 70-210 f4, sharp, fast enough for the indoor pool that my kids compete at, and at ~500g light enough to be carried all day (it's no good if you always leave it at home b/c it's too heavy to be lugged around).  When I scour the Nikon lineup, I found nothing that would fit the bill:  the af nikon 70-210 f4 is no good by most reviews, the af 80-200 and the 70-200 f4 are easily 300g more (please jump in and correct me everyone )

Through Bjorn's lens reviews, I found the 75-150 and the 70-210 e series and they look like they would fit my requirements so I began to scour ebay.  When an excellent condition 75-150 popped up for $65, what is there to wait for?   If it doesn't work out, I'll make a mug out of it

The lens was supposed to come next Wednesday according to the listing but when I got home yesterday, there it was waiting for me.  Holy smoke batman!!  Excited didn't even begin to describe it... Even though I had lunch at 11 and was starved when I got home, I didn't have dinner until almost 9.

This is a later generation version with the chrome ring.  The lens is known to have zoom creep but for my lens, it got .. lens diarrhea ??  Tilting in any direction and Newton and his apple would come into play.  Since I'm no Rick Haw and just happened to have an inch of electrical tape around, the lens was cure in no time flat.  Now, pointing it straight down and the lens will still stay while remaining silky smooth to zoom.  The only thing I need to remember is not to leave the lens baking in the sun or things could get ugly

The runs aside, the optics looks flawless.  Pop it on, select non-cpu lens, focal length (fl) 105mm, max ap. 3.5 and off I went.  A few shots, checked the exif to see what the camera saw and everything is good, fl is always 105, aperture is whatever I dialed in.   Checked for general focusing problem by going wide open and pick a flower to focus on.  Without pixel peeping, everything looked clear at wide open (and I mean everything corner to corner). Life was good.

As I just started on Nikon (the body was delivered a week and a half ago though I researched and read the whole d7200 manual long before that ), I only have the kit lens 18-140 to compare it to (well, I do have a 35-70 3.5-4.5 from the old n2020 but the two lens have only 1 fl point in common so it is kinda of silly to test). 

Long ago, I decided that shooting charts and brick walls are not for me (they are not my normal subjects ok, neither are license plates but they are a whole lot easier targets).  To compare lenses, I would pick a point that can be reached by the lens in questions, walk around the neighborhood and shoot license plates (our plates here are black lettering on glowy white--lots of CA potentials).  With the D7200, this is even easier as I "measured" the same distance by filling up the Nikon focusing rectangle with the license plate, moving the focus square from center, to left center, then right center.  To check for the lens for its true performance, I would do the test with a tripod (btw, I generally don't do tripod, only using them for family group pics;  hate carrying any extra weights as I have enough carrying my own

Since I shot license plates and want to maintain the good grace of my neighbors, I will refrain from uploading any of those pics here   My results seem to indicate that my copy of the 75-150 is better optically than my copy of the 18-140.  Some of the 18-140 pics might look better but that were due to better color and contrast, and I wasn't worrying about that.  The test was how well the plate numbers look and the 75-150 wins out.

Unfortunately this is where the story turns sour.  I took the camera off the tripod and repeat the tests.  After all, this is how I normally shoot, with no tripod.  The 75 would be my hand held telephoto.  The result:  though the 75 won out on the shorter end, the 18-140 wins out at 100mm and above.  I repeat the tests with better techniques for the 75 (bracing the elbows against the body, "control your breathing grasshopper" .. for those who missed this point, google "Kung fu, David Carridine" ) and the 18-140 with its VR still wins unless I was leaning on a tree or a mailbox to shoot

Acknowledging defeat, I walked around the neighborhood, re-learning manual focusing, finding my limits with this lens.  Ended up taking the camera + lens to work this morning as well, taking pictures on the way in.  Only stopped when the battery is practically gone (no more display but still taking shots )  400+ pics in all, mostly test shots from last night though.

Things I learned: 

• the focusing dot for this lens is not accurate and will need to be calibrated
• focusing, though much more accurate, with live view is not the way to go; it exacerbates the hand shaking problem and messes up the composition.. royally.  I guess I can always edit and crop but I hate doing that
• under 100mm, I am pretty good, over 100mm, the usable range of shutter speed and iso couldn't help.  better find something to brace against (maybe a string monopod is in order ?? )
• outdoor, in good light, this lens kicks butts
• indoor, with normal lighting or worse, like the cruise that we will take in early August, better bring the 18-140 instead
• manual focusing is actually fun; it makes me think about each shot, where to place the focus point, what do I want to emphasize....
• the d7200 doesn't do wi-fi when battery is below 20%
• the battery might rated for 1100 shots, but not when you are always checking the display, using live view )

and lastly, 

• photography is fun .. .again

some pics tomorrow as I left my card reader at home (in the canon bag ) and like I said above, the camera doesn't do wi-fi when battery is low

[Bjørn Rørslett]

There is a place for almost any lens. The 18-140 actually is a very good all-round performer for DX cameras. Alas, it does not do IR well enough so I refrained from getting one for myself after the review period.

The 75-150 f/3.5 is an excellent lens which has garnered a devoted following over the years. Not surprising with its combination of excellent build, good optical performance and small size. It also excels in IR photography. However, focusing it requires a camera suitable for MF lenses. Try it on a Df.

The 70-210 f/4 E is a little of this and a little of that. Optically it pretty good, but lower contrast makes it less easy to make images 'pop'. It is also quite bulky compared to the 75-150. For IR fans it is a decent alternative among the disappointingly few zoom lenses capable of quality IR work.

[richardHaw]

Hi! I find this lens to be rather useful. It is pretty good despite the E label.

If you want to see how it is inside, you can check my blog with the link below
https://richardhaw.wordpress.com/2016/03/20/e-75-150mm-f3-5/

This is definitely one of the E lenses that did not get a lot of cost-cutting. the 70-210E was also built well and not too different from the Nikkor 100-300 f/5.6, i recently overhauled one and I noticed the similarities. Ric.

[tdoan]

Try it on a Df.

Now you tell me

The 70-210 f/4 E is a little of this and a little of that. Optically it pretty good, but lower contrast makes it less easy to make images 'pop'. It is also quite bulky compared to the 75-150.

My Canon 70-210 f/4 is the same way at wide open, having lower contrast.  But it's sharp and lightweight at ~500g even.  I have a lens case and just put that on my belt loop, swapping lens when needed. 

Anyway, here are some shots on the way to work this morning.  When I started at home it was still quite dark and by the time I got to DC, the sun started to peak over the horizon, lightening sky but dark buildings as the sun is blocked by the buildings.

The building across from the station
DSC_0514 by tiendoan, on Flickr

heard the whistle and got to run

Outside the station in DC
DSC_0521 by tiendoan, on Flickr

I think they were having breakfast together but I can't see what they were having.  maybe they were just chatting   the 100% crop is pretty amazing as I nailed this focus wise.
DSC_0522 by tiendoan, on Flickr

fired a quick one as I was crossing the street, wide open focus set near infinity so that I can check the plates later (what is this obsession with plates ) on 100% crop, can read them just fine.
DSC_0523 by tiendoan, on Flickr

looking back at the station
DSC_0524 by tiendoan, on Flickr

outside of the Senate office building
DSC_0526 by tiendoan, on Flickr

the flower bed in front of the Senate bldg
DSC_0527 by tiendoan, on Flickr

on the steps of the Supreme Court
DSC_0529 by tiendoan, on Flickr

approaching the Library of Congress, this one is definitely out of focus, a mistake because I was trying to focus on the dark dome.
DSC_0530 by tiendoan, on Flickr

More later.  I'm not at home now and this site is not responsive themed.   Hard on thea old eyes

[tdoan]

Hi Rick
Read that 75 tear down and quite a few others on your site.   Ordered my Vessel set on eBay yesterday but when I looked at my 75 today,  tested the lens sleeve and saw how tight it sticks,  I don't think I would ever try to disassemble it as I think I would tear the sleeve.  And this lens is in such pristine shape. ..
Well at least the tools will come in handy when I decide to chip this lens I got a Dandelion coming but I don't think I'll ever use it as it would inevitably break down in a year or less. (Didn't know that until i came here.  Bjørn told me and I looked further)
Anyway,  signing off.   This little screen is killing me:)

Have a good one Rick and nice taking to you.

[richardHaw]

Be careful with the sleeve. I just tore one last week (100-300) as it was too long and the rubber is old.
careful with the screws on the bayonet. place a drop of acetone first and let that sit for a half an hour before you work on them

the zoom creep can be fixed on 2 point on this lens. it can be annoying so many people just leave it alone.

[tdoan]

Be careful with the sleeve. I just tore one last week (100-300) as it was too long and the rubber is old.
careful with the screws on the bayonet. place a drop of acetone first and let that sit for a half an hour before you work on them

the zoom creep can be fixed on 2 point on this lens. it can be annoying so many people just leave it alone.

Let me guess: no replacement sleeve?  Even though I'm normally a function over form guy, I think I will leave mine alone   The tape seems to work well and I'm usually good with my photo gear, we'll see how that goes. 

I got it out again last night and took some more pics.  The only thing that bugs me about this setup is the focusing.  I started reading on better manual focusing techniques and hit on the split prism.  Aha. that was how we used to focus, funny how the mind was swept clean by all this af technology.  I googled and will be ordering a focusing screen for my d7200.  It's unfortunate that Katzeye is closed , so if anyone has a recommendation please do so quickly

some pics from yesterday

this one I nailed the focus.  funny how I walked by that statue so many times yet never notice the "horns" on his head.  photography does make you open your eyes

DSC_0536 by tiendoan, on Flickr

these next two, one was focused with the dot, the other using LV..  I can tell which is which without zooming in

DSC_0537 by tiendoan, on Flickr

DSC_0538 by tiendoan, on Flickr

hard to convey the grandeur of this building with a telephoto, wrong fl

DSC_0539 by tiendoan, on Flickr

a spot in the ceiling

DSC_0559 by tiendoan, on Flickr

All in all, lens is great for the price, but two drawbacks that will keep me from carrying on a trip:  focusing in low light and stability over 100mm.  I'll see if the focusing screen and the string pod help but that will have to wait for at least a week ...

Have a nice weekend everyone.


PS:  just want to add, all the pics are jpeg direct from the camera, no fix, no crop

[the solitaire]

Hi Tien,

your story on the search for a suitable lens reminds me of a lens search I finially finished a few weeks ago.
Rather then the excellent 75-150 f3,5 series E lens I picked up an 80-200 f4 Ai-S. Also a gem of a lens. Sharp and contrasty wide open. If you don't like the results from the 70-210 f4 series E I can recommend the 80-200 f4 Ai-S!

[tdoan]

Hi Buddy

Thanks for stopping by   I'm sure you are well versed with this right, http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_00.html ?

Also, another good review on the Nikon zooms here, http://www.jsvfoto.com/NikonZooms

The main problem is none of these lenses are in the 500-600g area, with the closest being slightly over 800g.  The extra 60% weight will make the stabilization a bigger issue.

While testing out this lens I came to the hard realizations that

• over 100mm, I really need VR or monopod or something.  I have been getting away with it b/c for the swim shots, I am usually on one knee with the elbow propping up the camera.  I have been ignoring the blurry shots , attributing them to the slow af focus of the older lens.
• that means for this range, 70-200, I have no choice but to move up to the modern lens with vr, vc, or os whatever the different manufacturers decide to call them.  All of these f4 (Tamron, Nikon, Sigma, Tokina--in order sharpness according to my research by people who test charts) are between 800 and 900g.

Can anyone make a recommendation among the above mentioned 4 or others?  I value real life experience more.

Thanks

[Roland Vink]

The 70-210E was also built well and not too different from the Nikkor 100-300 f/5.6, I recently overhauled one and I noticed the similarities. Ric.

Not too surprised by this, both are 3x zooms with constant aperture, moderately close focusing with macro mode at the short end. Build is similar too, with black anodised finish (not black enamel paint found on most AIS primes). Only the plastic aperture ring on the 70-210 distinguishes it as a Series-E lens. The AIS 100-300 could easily be considered a stretched Series-E 70-210, with the focal length and close focus limits (more or less) stretched by 40%, and a corresponding loss of one stop, as if a 1.4x TC were used.

The 100-300 was introduced in 1994 when the series-E line was already being phased out, otherwise it would probably have been a series-E lens. In fact, most non-pro AIS zooms have Series-E features such as black anodised barrels (not black enamel paint found on primes and pro zooms), and some have plastic aperture or macro rings, the AIS 35-70/3.3-4.5 even has a plastic focus ring.

Getting back to the 75-150, it is a good lens. The compact size, relatively fast speed and not-too-long focal length make it very hand-holdable. Sharpness is good and bokeh is usually pleasing. It also focuses quite close which is useful. With a close-up lens like the Nikon 3T it becomes a good macro zoom. It shows its age mainly due to the older coatings and poorer control of CA compared to modern lenses. An updated version with improved coatings and ED glass would be very welcome, but that's the stuff of dreams.

[Roland Vink]

While testing out this lens I came to the hard realizations that

• over 100mm, I really need VR or monopod or something.  I have been getting away with it b/c for the swim shots, I am usually on one knee with the elbow propping up the camera.  I have been ignoring the blurry shots , attributing them to the slow af focus of the older lens.
• that means for this range, 70-200, I have no choice but to move up to the modern lens with vr, vc, or os whatever the different manufacturers decide to call them.  All of these f4 (Tamron, Nikon, Sigma, Tokina--in order sharpness according to my research by people who test charts) are between 800 and 900g.

Can anyone make a recommendation among the above mentioned 4 or others?  I value real life experience more.

Of the third party manufacturers, only Tokina make a 70-200/4 lens. Its size and weight are very similar to the Nikon version which weighs 850g. If these lenses are too heavy, the only modern alternative is the 24-120/4 VR which weighs 710g, so not a lot lighter and less reach. There is also the 70-300 VR at 745g. If you want a lighter telephoto zoom you need to look a DX camera with a 55-200 VR lens.

[Bill De Jager]

I keep wishing they'd come out with a modern version of this lens with AF and VR.  I'd be happy to have a modest zoom range and moderate speed in return for compact size and light weight.  This could be 50-100 f/2.8 DX or 75-150 f/3.5 or f/4 FX. 

All current alternatives are either heavy and fast or else too slow, just so you can have a big zoom range.  I have the Sigma 50-100 which is a good lens, but it's a monster in terms of weight and size.  It's really for specialized uses, not to be lugged around all day while on the move.

[tdoan]

Thank you Roland, Bill for weighing in.  At this point, I think the plan (still hatching in my head) is for my wife to get me the Nikon f4 vr for Xmas because I'm pretty sure anything above f/4 would not work for swimming much less basketball.  I remember trying a 4.5 lens on my t2i and that didn't work out too well (keeper's rate low).  the d7200 has better iso but I can't imagine 5.6 would work.  would be happy to be wrong   i will look closely at the Tokina also though.  And yes, the 24-120 is definitely too short.

I keep wishing they'd come out with a modern version of this lens with AF and VR.  I'd be happy to have a modest zoom range and moderate speed in return for compact size and light weight.  This could be 50-100 f/2.8 DX or 75-150 f/3.5 or f/4 FX. 

All current alternatives are either heavy and fast or else too slow, just so you can have a big zoom range.  I have the Sigma 50-100 which is a good lens, but it's a monster in terms of weight and size.  It's really for specialized uses, not to be lugged around all day while on the move.

Maybe the modern photographer is supposed to come with a porter, like the old knight needs his squire