Nikon 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 AF Zoom

[JohnBrew]

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?

[John Geerts]

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

[Roland Vink]

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.

[David H. Hartman]

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

[David H. Hartman]

Would this lens play well with a D810?

I think it plays well with a D800.

Dave

[longzoom]

2017-03-16 033-1 by l[url=https://flic.kr/p/SvXXC9]2017-03-16 033-1-2 by 2017-03-16 034-1 by longzoom, on 2017-03-16 034-1-2 by 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.)

[JohnBrew]

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.

[longzoom]

2017-05-26 001-1 by 2017-05-26 003-1 by longzoom, on Flickrtos/longzoom/]longzoom[/url], on Flickr.   At 28mm and at 70mm, edited in LR.  LZ

[Roland Vink]

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...

[longzoom]

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

[Roland Vink]

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?

[longzoom]

Exactly!  LZ

[Roland Vink]

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?

[longzoom]

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

[Roland Vink]

Thanks - good answer!