Nikon 28-105/3.5-4.5

[asabet]

Like it's Canon equivalent, the Niklon 28-105/3.5-4.5 is an inexpensive good performer on 35mm full frame. Less than $200 used, very compact, surprisingly little barrel distortion at 28mm, sharp, minimal CA, fair bokeh characteristics, nice colors, and fast focusing despite the lack of AF-S (very short throw). Here are a couple snaps from today using the 1:2.7 macro setting:

100% crop from the second image:

Seems that this was a popular lens with film. Understandably less popular on APS-C digital, which is more demanding on glass (in terms of resolution) and makes this an awkward zoom range.

 

[jonoslack]

Like it's Canon equivalent, the Niklon 28-105/3.5-4.5 is an inexpensive good performer on 35mm full frame. Less than $200 used, very compact, surprisingly little barrel distortion at 28mm, sharp, minimal CA, fair bokeh characteristics, nice colors, and fast focusing despite the lack of AF-S (very short throw). Here are a couple snaps from today using the 1:2.7 macro setting:

100% crop from the second image:

Seems that this was a popular lens with film. Understandably less popular on APS-C digital, which is more demanding on glass (in terms of resolution) and makes this an awkward zoom range.

Excellent Amin
Thank you for the reminder, I'm digging in the cupboard already!

I wonder if my copy is as good as yours.

 

[ptomsu]

While I am happy for you that you like this lens, there are much better options meanwhile in the Nikkor lens lineup.

 

[Maarten]

While I am happy for you that you like this lens, there are much better options meanwhile in the Nikkor lens lineup.

Could you tell me which ones you are thinking of? One of my hopes for the upcoming Photokina is that Nikon will present a 24-105 F4 AFS VR lens. I now use the 24-85 AFD 2.8 - 4.0 on my D700, which is okay.

 

[jonoslack]

While I am happy for you that you like this lens, there are much better options meanwhile in the Nikkor lens lineup.

Actually Peter
For full frame it's becoming rapidly and abundantly clear that there aren't that many great options. - at least, in the midwide-mid telephoto range.

Soft corners at the wide end seems to be the worst culprit (read REALLY soft corners).

I've had this lens for years, and appreciated it's good qualities on the Kodak 14n, I'll be testing it on the D700 soon.

If you are looking for a mid-range compact zoom for travel, I still have not come across one which is okay - perhaps you know differently?

 

[jonoslack]

Could you tell me which ones you are thinking of? One of my hopes for the upcoming Photokina is that Nikon will present a 24-105 F4 AFS VR lens. I now use the 24-85 AFD 2.8 - 4.0 on my D700, which is okay.

HI Marten

Is the 24-85 f2.8-f4 AFD any good? More to the point, does it have sharp corners at 24mm . . . at least from f5.6?

I'm still looking for a wide-medium compact lens for travel (I've got the fab 24-70, but it's hardly light and portable!)

I bought the 18-35 on the recommendation of many - and the corners are impossible - even at f8, so it had to go back.

I'd forgotten the 28-105, which is why this thread is so welcome!

The modern lenses are awful (24-120) I've tried the fast sigma and tamron lenses and they're all impossible too.

 

[Maarten]

HI Marten

Is the 24-85 f2.8-f4 AFD any good? More to the point, does it have sharp corners at 24mm . . . at least from f5.6?

Hi Jono,

Actually, I don't know ... I don't think it is really worth considering before we know what the Photokina is going to bring us. I often like the down to earth and practical reviews of Bjørn Rørslett. For this lens: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_01.html#AF24-85f2.8

If you want I could make and post some samples photo's.

 

[asabet]

While I am happy for you that you like this lens, there are much better options meanwhile in the Nikkor lens lineup.

Peter, I'm all ears. The pro zooms are of better of course. Amongst the consumer zooms, the reviews, user comments, and sample images did not convince me that either of the 24-85 lenses or either of the 24-120 lenses are better than the 28-105.

Jono, the corners are not sharp on this lens. The overall performance is good enough for most of my purposes, but even the Olympus 14-42 has sharper corners at the wide end.

 

[jonoslack]

Hi Jono,

Actually, I don't know ... I don't think it is really worth considering before we know what the Photokina is going to bring us. I often like the down to earth and practical reviews of Bjørn Rørslett. For this lens: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_01.html#AF24-85f2.8

If you want I could make and post some samples photo's.

HI Maarten
Of course, you're quite right - I like Bjorn's reviews as well, (although I don't always agree, for instance, I think the new 105 macro is the dog's doodahs). It would be throwing good money after bad - I just would like a decent small prime for travel, at the moment it's pertinant as we're going for a couple of weeks to Crete in September, to call it a 'hiking' trip would be too grand, but we'll do a lot of walking, and I don't fancy carrying the 14-24 and the 24-70.

Truth is, I'll probably take the Olympus E3 (which DOES have excellent mid size lenses) together with an M8 and a couple of lenses. I'd have liked to take the Nikon though (hence the big interest in the 18mm).

Nikon really do need to address this, but I'm afraid I have a bad feeling that the combination of the lens mount size and the large sensor makes it pretty unlikely that they'll succeed.

 

[Terry]

A wide Voigtlander prime would be a nice Photokina present.

 

[jonoslack]

A wide Voigtlander prime would be a nice Photokina present.

Yes Indeed
I'd just like a decent, small, mid range zoom though!

 

[Vivek]

(Sorry for the OT post)

Hi Jono, You changed your Avatar.

 

[jonoslack]

(Sorry for the OT post)

Hi Jono, You changed your Avatar.

Yeah - I got bored of that stupid fart with the hat on looking back at me!
I found the first thing that looked okay at 80pixels and used that instead.

It's a great improvement (don't you think?)

 

[Vivek]

Actually, no!

I thought the expression of that guy with the hat was a classic!

 

[woodyspedden]

HI Maarten
Of course, you're quite right - I like Bjorn's reviews as well, (although I don't always agree, for instance, I think the new 105 macro is the dog's doodahs). It would be throwing good money after bad - I just would like a decent small prime for travel, at the moment it's pertinant as we're going for a couple of weeks to Crete in September, to call it a 'hiking' trip would be too grand, but we'll do a lot of walking, and I don't fancy carrying the 14-24 and the 24-70.

Truth is, I'll probably take the Olympus E3 (which DOES have excellent mid size lenses) together with an M8 and a couple of lenses. I'd have liked to take the Nikon though (hence the big interest in the 18mm).

Nikon really do need to address this, but I'm afraid I have a bad feeling that the combination of the lens mount size and the large sensor makes it pretty unlikely that they'll succeed.

Hey Jono

How about the Voightlander 40 2.0 and your favorite Voightlander 58 1.4. Both are small and lightweight and get rather outstanding IQ?

Woody

 

[jonoslack]

Actually, no!

I thought the expression of that guy with the hat was a classic!

Ahh Vivek - just imagine it was YOU making that expression at YOU every day.

I kept thinking - who's that old prat? then remembering!

 

[jonoslack]

Hey Jono

How about the Voightlander 40 2.0 and your favorite Voightlander 58 1.4. Both are small and lightweight and get rather outstanding IQ?

Woody

Hi Woody
Of course - and if I take the Nikon they will go along (at least, the 58 would definitely go).
However, if you're walking over grand countryside:

South West Crete Pictures

They don't really cover a lot of ground.

The honest truth is that if I were to go with a few primes (which is what I did last year), then I'd take the M8 again - high ISO isn't much of an issue, and it definitely produces the best resolution for landscape work.

Still, I fancy a bit more range, the trade off being a little IQ.

The 4/3 lenses are startlingly good - of course the smaller sensor means that the high ISO isn't that great and you probably lose a stop of Dynamic Range, but 3 lenses, all of which will focus down to almost no distance, will take you from an equivalent 14-600mm. They're all sharp - right to the corners, and apart from the wide (which is still smaller than the Nikon) they're really small. You can shoot any of them wide open at any focal length. Most underrated!