NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Ian R on September 10, 2015, 23:03:54
-
I saw this for sale on Monday for £50 in the used rack in my local photo shop. I had wondered about it in the past as it was the replacement for the 35-70 that I already have. As I do think that having 28mm would be useful at times on a travel lens I purchased it. The weather has not been that great this week and today was the first day I was able to find some worthwhile light.
You know what, I am really quite impressed. Even wide open at 70mm it is still sharp and clear and that quality is available all across the zoom range. I can see myself using this lens a lot more. I thought I would share two photos I took with it today but of course I am all ears (and eyes) for what other users have to say. Anyone else have this lens?
-
Ian, I don't own the lens but your photos tell me that there is nothing wrong with it.
Keep on enjoying your lens and keep on posting images :)
-
Love these houseboats on the river ...?
-
Ian, can you tell me if your 28-70 lens is a DX version?
Fons these are narrow boats on a canal, they are only 7 feet wide so as to fit in the locks.
-
Thanks for the comments - and yes, that is a canal (Grand Union). It runs near to my house so a nice place to walk along away from traffic.
Mike, no - its an actually an FX lens, dating from 1991 and was a kit lens for the F601.
-
Silly me I was thinking of the 18-70mm that was a kit lens for the D70 series, oops. :-[
-
Here is an early test from my new AF 28-70/3.5-4.5D Nikkor. The photo is nothing special. I had a few seconds to run across the street from the bank while a friend was making a deposit. I think I'm going to like this lens.
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1648/24210798344_1263d828cd.jpg) (https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1648/24210798344_34a6a2a6f7_h.jpg)
Please click photo for a larger view.
Dave
-
I had it for the F801s it's a wonderful little lens with only mild distortion and CA due to Nikons first hybrid aspheric lens in a Nikkor lens.
Highly recommended!
The front was rotating not so nice,,,
-
The optics of this lens were surprisingly good. I also noted that the lens, quite uncommon for its time, had good resistance against flare and ghosts.
I never owned the lens myself, but recall it was quite popular with people attending my work shops around the end of the last century.
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2461/32930620556_9b95abefc0_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SaY3cW)2017-02-14 004-1 (https://flic.kr/p/SaY3cW) by (https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2171/32127669144_9067133d8e_b.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/long[url=https://flic.kr/p/QX1GJ5)2017-02-14 004-1-2 (https://flic.kr/p/QX1GJ5) by longzoom (https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzoom/), on Flickrzoom/]longzoom[/url], on Flickr(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/594/32817106522_7d16e50baf_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RZWfrq)2017-02-14 004-1-3 (https://flic.kr/p/RZWfrq) by longzoom (https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzoom/), on Flickr. I can only confirm what Bjorn said - unusually good flare resistance, very good resolving power thru the range, especially at f8.0 on the extremely demanding D810 sensor. Not bad at all for 26 years old technology! May recommend this small wonder instead of 50mm, if 5.6-11 is OK. So the sample image at f8.0, 2 crops. It is last "D" version. THX! LZ
-
Also a favourite of mine due to size and range. I bought a second of a pittance just in case! They usually sell around here (often with a F401, etc) for $60 canadian!
@38mm and f/5.6
-
Nice image! Actually, I am not planning to use mine one widely, but as a compliment to my 80-400G, when I need something wide. The 28-70 is so small and light, it isn't added any substantial weight to this huge combo, but supporting me reliable. THX! LZ
-
Great image Brent. Very nice results with this lens.
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2834/32706729823_e00a333323_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RQbxhT)2017-03-16 031-1 (https://flic.kr/p/RQbxhT) by (https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2935/32706725613_5c65512865_b.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/[url=https://flic.kr/p/RQbw3i)2017-03-16 031-1-2 (https://flic.kr/p/RQbw3i) by longzoom (https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzoom/), on Flickrlongzoom/]longzoom[/url], on Flickr. Take a look at this image (just a sample), and crop, especially. Does it remind you something? Yes, it looks very similar to the old Noct. Because of use of the aspherical element, I believe! THX! LZ
-
Quite good images from this "hidden" jewel.
Thanks to everyone for posting - I'm thinking this lens could replace several of my heavy primes for a lighter hiking kit.
Could anyone give me the filter size?
-
Looked it up on KEH. They say it is an AF Macro lens. Is that the correct one? It gives the filter size at 52, that makes it tiny!
Would this lens play well with a D810?
-
Attachment size: 52mm (P=0.75mm); Rotating when zoom and/or focusing
More info here: http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/AFNikkor/AF2870mm/index.htm (http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/AFNikkor/AF2870mm/index.htm)
-
From memory the AF 28-70/3.5-4.5 filter rotates on focusing but not on zooming.
Also, the "macro range" seems to be put there by the marketing department, it is really no more than close end of the normal focus range - focus to 0.39m at all zoom settings. no special macro switches or settings required. Whether it is a real macro mode or not, it gives magnifications up to 1:4.6, so is quite handy for casual closeups.
-
The filter size is the classic 52mm. I use an HN-3 hood with no filter. I would guess an HN-2 might be required to avoid vignetting if a filter is used.
Ken Rockwell gives a useful review of this lens. Please note: I do NOT recommend making a buying decision based on Ken's reviews alone.
Do test for decentering as these were kit lenses and some may been knocked out of alignment without showing apparent abuse. I bought three and kept two.
Dave Hartman
-
Would this lens play well with a D810?
I think it plays well with a D800.
Dave
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2917/32726050433_4485758dde_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RRTyCR)2017-03-16 033-1 (https://flic.kr/p/RRTyCR) by l[url=https://flic.kr/p/SvXXC9](https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2891/33156935060_2bc23810cf_b.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzoom/)2017-03-16 033-1-2 (https://flic.kr/p/SvXXC9) by (https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3727/33156922590_644944e5e6_b.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/p[url=https://flic.kr/p/SvXTV9)2017-03-16 034-1 (https://flic.kr/p/SvXTV9) by longzoom (https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzoom/), on (https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2858/33383571072_64e6898e3f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SRZwBA)2017-03-16 034-1-2 (https://flic.kr/p/SRZwBA) by longzoom (https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzoom/), on FlickrFlickrhotos/longzoom/]longzoom[/url], on Flickrongzoom[/url], on Flickr.
Dave, what you said is correct, out of questions. There is some sample variations on this lens, so, it took me some time and efforts to got a good copy, and adjust it to my D810 body as it must be. Not bad today for 26 years back technology, I believe. So 2 sample images at 28 and 70 mm, 2 crops. THX! LZ (More info please find on Flickr, by clicking on any pic.)
-
From memory the AF 28-70/3.5-4.5 filter rotates on focusing but not on zooming.
Also, the "macro range" seems to be put there by the marketing department, it is really is no more than close end of the normal focus range (focus to 0.39m at all zoom settings), no special macro switches or settings required.
Thanks, Roland. Very helpful.
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4204/34126442273_4599252c95_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/TZCWkK)2017-05-26 001-1 (https://flic.kr/p/TZCWkK) by (https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4273/34126434213_01620cc50e_b.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/pho[url=https://flic.kr/p/TZCTWM)2017-05-26 003-1 (https://flic.kr/p/TZCTWM) by longzoom (https://www.flickr.com/photos/longzoom/), on Flickrtos/longzoom/]longzoom[/url], on Flickr. At 28mm and at 70mm, edited in LR. LZ
-
LZ, have you tried the AF-G 28-200/3.5-5.6? This lens is amazingly compact, except for the larger 62mm filter it is hardly bigger or heavier than the AF-D 28-70/3.5-4.5. I guess over the same focal length range the max aperture is similar too. I read some good reports from this lens, I wonder how it compares with its little brother?
My wife sometimes wishes I had an "automatic" lens for my D600 so she could use it, the 28-70 or 28-200 seem to be good options...
-
Yes, I did work with it. It was decentered, but, fortunately, was very easy to fix. Appeared to be very sharp, I'd say amazingly sharp, thru the range, after all. A bit of CA, distortions and vignetting, but nothing what wouldn't be fixed in post-pro. I'd not pay $300 and more, but $220 and less so is good price for good copy today. $100 or less for 28-70D is OK, but for very last copies, you know better what those ### are! Good luck! LZ
-
Is there something different about the last copies?
Maybe you mean the last series with 32xxxxx serial numbers, they have a different chip, I think cameras will do auto distortion control with that one but not earlier ... is that what you mean?
-
Exactly! LZ
-
Another question: is there a reason you use the AFD 28-70/3.5-4.5 instead of the AFG 28-200?
I had the 28-70 years ago and felt it was the best of the compact standard zooms.
But the AFG 28-200 is hardly bigger or heavier, has much more zoom range, has a good reputation (I read the bokeh wasn't so good), seems like a useful walk-around zoom?
-
Good question, but simple answer - I already have stunningly good, for such the lens, 28-300 VR. 28-70, this small and light one, I need to complement my heavy 80-400. 28-200, while beautiful, without VR has no use for me at its long end. I can manage 70mm, but 100-200... sorry... THX! LZ
-
Thanks - good answer!