Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
About the Nikkor AF-D 28-105mm f3.5-4.5
#1
How is this zoom lens? The lens seems to have a very good reputation among users. Many people have talked about the very low distortion which is only seen in the range of 28-35mm and beyond which distortion is hardly seen. This character seems very remarkable among zoom lenses in this FL range.



A used copy of this lens has a very good price, so I have a desire to buy one. But I want to know sharpness wise how this lens is compared to the AF-D 24-85mm f2.8-4. Are they similar or is one better than the other?



I also want to know the comparison of this lens to the AF-S 24-120mm f4 VR (also sharpness wise). I know the latter is much more modern but from the test results at PZ I don't think its IQ justifies its high price.



Thank you for opinions in advance.



Best regards,

Frank
#2
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1336058624' post='17978']

How is this zoom lens? The lens seems to have a very good reputation among users. Many people have talked about the very low distortion which is only seen in the range of 28-35mm and beyond which distortion is hardly seen. This character seems very remarkable among zoom lenses in this FL range.



A used copy of this lens has a very good price, so I have a desire to buy one. But I want to know sharpness wise how this lens is compared to the AF-D 24-85mm f2.8-4. Are they similar or is one better than the other?



I also want to know the comparison of this lens to the AF-S 24-120mm f4 VR (also sharpness wise). I know the latter is much more modern but from the test results at PZ I don't think its IQ justifies its high price.



Thank you for opinions in advance.



Best regards,

Frank

[/quote]







These are very good remarks. I suppose you're considering using them on a fullframe body (otherwise it wouldn't make sense). I'm in the same boat as you. Unfortunately PZ only tested them (28-105 and 24-85) on a D200 which is far from being representative of their performance on a FF body.

As I found the IQ of the recent 24-120 f4 not that fantastic from the review here (especially given its price point), I decided to buy a 28-105 for testing purposes. As I got it for $140 I'm not taking much risk. I wanted to also get a 24-85 f2.8-4 as I value more the 4mm at the wide end and the brightness than the 20mm at the long end. However, I couldn't find any at a comparable price (they were all > $300).

From the PZ reviews both of these lenses fare very well though. I'd be curious to see how they fare on a D3X or a D800...



As soon as I get my D800 (should be on May 31st), I'll let you know how the 28-105 behaves!
--Florent

Flickr gallery
#3
[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1336164603' post='18017']

These are very good remarks. I suppose you're considering using them on a fullframe body (otherwise it wouldn't make sense). I'm in the same boat as you. Unfortunately PZ only tested them (28-105 and 24-85) on a D200 which is far from being representative of their performance on a FF body.

As I found the IQ of the recent 24-120 f4 not that fantastic from the review here (especially given its price point), I decided to buy a 28-105 for testing purposes. As I got it for $140 I'm not taking much risk. I wanted to also get a 24-85 f2.8-4 as I value more the 4mm at the wide end and the brightness than the 20mm at the long end. However, I couldn't find any at a comparable price (they were all > $300).

From the PZ reviews both of these lenses fare very well though. I'd be curious to see how they fare on a D3X or a D800...



As soon as I get my D800 (should be on May 31st), I'll let you know how the 28-105 behaves!

[/quote]



I didn't find the test of the 28-205mm on D200 at PZ. I only found the test of the 24-85mm (both the AF-D and the AF-S) on D200.



I remember that Markus has got a 28-105mm and will test it.



And yes, I intend to use it on D700.



Best regards,

Frank
#4
Surprizingly I find this lens has "brand new" versions on sale at ebay. This lens was discontinued since 2005/2006, so a "brand new" lens should have been in stock for 6+ years. I wonder if a brand new discontinued lens is better than a used one. Isn't bad to store a lens without using it for a too long time (many years)?
#5
No, it is not bad at all to store a lens for decades even.
#6
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1336566000' post='18077']

No, it is not bad at all to store a lens for decades even.

[/quote]



Really? Then I don't understand why it (the ebay one) is even cheaper than a used one.
#7
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1336566652' post='18078']

Really? Then I don't understand why it (the ebay one) is even cheaper than a used one.

[/quote]

It is ebay.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)