Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,688   Posts: 1,548,674   Online: 1242
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 40
  1. #11
    johnnywalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,255
    Images
    78
    Anybody have any comments on the 43 - 86 3.5? I got one on a whim very cheaply, but don't use it much.
    If I had been present at the creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better arrangement of the Universe.
    Alfonso the Wise, 1221-1284

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,105
    When I was a teenager (during the 1980's), I loved the 43-86mm... but I have learned from that experience! That lens, which I still have in fact, is an early non-AI model, and has lots of flare with very poor resolution. I've heard that the last version, which was AI, was slightly better but I don't know how true that is. Most lens reviewers give this lens a very hard time, with some going so far as to blame it for the bad reputation of zoom lenses in general. This isn't quite fair as there are certainly other bad zoom lenses, as well as really great ones. Since you already have one, it might be put to good use as a portrait lens.

  3. #13
    johnnywalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,255
    Images
    78
    I had heard rumblings that it wasn't the best lens Nikon ever made, but that's a useful tip regarding trying it as a portrait lens. Now all I need to do is find someone besides one of the dogs to sit for me (pun intended).
    If I had been present at the creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better arrangement of the Universe.
    Alfonso the Wise, 1221-1284

  4. #14
    denmark.yuzon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Pedro, Laguna, Philippines
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    116
    or should i get three primes... a 20ish, 50 and a 105 (or an 85)? would it be better than those zoom lenses?
    Flickr
    Multiply
    My PhotoBlog
    My Twitter!


    WTB: Konica Autoreflex T3 and AR lenses

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,115
    The 28-105 Nikkor is said to be a very good lens with a decent close focus ability.
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  6. #16
    Peter Black's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,001
    Images
    23
    I have the AF-D version of the Nikkor 35-105 and have always found it to be an acceptably sharp lens. However, once I started hanging round internet forums I realised I "had" to get something faster and sharper, so moved onto the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 which I found to be a fine lens, albeit one that could be a bit strange wrt focus when a polariser was fitted. So as I couldn't afford the bigtime Nikkors, I was convinced that the 35-70 f2.8 was the way to go and then I could sell the Tamron.

    The great thing about having more than one camera is that you can convince yourself that you might just have to keep both lenses. The truth was that my copy of the Tamron was every bit as good as the Nikkor 35-70, but with the benefit of the extra reach and therefore I still have them both, plus the 35-105! The 35-70 is a pro-build metal lens with faster AF, which won't be an issue on your MF gear. If it means anything to you, Ken Rockwell eventually got round to testing it at the link below.

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/3570.htm

    My final thought would be that the manual 35-105 always seemed to attract a higher price than the AF version,even though they were both metal bodied lenses, so that may say something. I'd certainly advise you to try any of these lenses if the price is right.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by denmark.yuzon View Post
    or should i get three primes... a 20ish, 50 and a 105 (or an 85)? would it be better than those zoom lenses?
    I'll vote for the three fast primes. With some practice you'll be able to swap lenses by feel in the dark if necessary and almost as quickly as zooming in and out.

    A lite jacket with a lens in each side pocket and one on the camera works well for a tourist/walke around kit.

    Over 30 years I've owned the 43-86, the 80-200, and the 24-120 Nikkor zooms. None of them IMHO have ever matched the sharpness of the fast primes.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Jersey (again)
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,976
    Years ago, I bought the Vivitar Series 1 f/2.8 35-85 lens. It's variable focus and not a true zoom, although most people would consider it to be a zoom.

    It's a fat, heavy lens with a large focusing ring. I was always satisfied with the results, despite the barrel distortion at the wide end -- which seems to be common with many zooms. Optically, it seemed sharp.

    But I was young, and I didn't pay as close attention to corner to corner performance and all of those OCD things. I just wanted to take photos, and for that, it performed admirably.

    And I agree that zooms are a trade-off -- convenience vs. performance.

  9. #19
    denmark.yuzon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Pedro, Laguna, Philippines
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    116
    oh ok... its hard being out in the streets and in the dark to change lenses often... so i favor zoom lenses though.. so i guess, yes... convenience vs. performance will be the deciding factor on what lens should i get next to my 50mm f/1.8...i dont know anything about third party brands.. and im too scared to try them, worrying about my money's worth... and some third party lenses dont even have a review online.. and testing these third party lenses would mean buying them, then get my negatives developed and printed first before knowing if its a gem or not... so far, you guys have mentioned tamron... and on my next visit to the flea market, il try to look for one...
    Flickr
    Multiply
    My PhotoBlog
    My Twitter!


    WTB: Konica Autoreflex T3 and AR lenses

  10. #20
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,842
    Images
    29
    As far as third party lenses go, you could look at Sigma.

    At the time your camera was being sold, Sigma were on the up and had a small range of prime lenses that were in the Nikon mount. At the time I was looking for some cheaper alternatives as money was tight, I looked at Tokina, Tamron and Sigma. After doing careful evaluation of all three aftermarket lenses, I chose Sigma as the best of the bunch.

    I have an 18mm which is not razor sharp like the Nikkor 18mm, and the 24mm which isn't quite as sharp as the sharpest 24mm Nikkor. However they are both very, very acceptable in both resolution, contrast and usability. I have shot both using colour negative and transparency film as well as B&W film. The colour difference between the Sigma and Nikkor lenses is very slight, about the same difference between some of the earlier Nikkor lenses and the later ones.

    The Sigma Super-Wide II 24mm which is an f2.8 with multi coating could be useful to you. It uses the 52mm standard Nikon filter size which is used by most Nikkor lenses. The Sigma lens I have is also good as it has click stops in half stop spacings, something no Nikkor lenses I have has.

    Another important feature of the Sigma range was the focusing direction. All of the Sigma lenses that I have used or own from this era, focused in the same direction as the Nikkor lenses. This may sound silly, but when you suddenly wish to go straight to infinity, you don't have to think which direction to go, it is the same direction as the Nikkor range.

    When travelling light, I run with the Sigma 24mm, 50 1.8 Nikkor and the 105 2.5 Nikkor. I took these three lenses to Germany in December/January last, great range for virtually any shooting situation.

    Mick.
    Last edited by Mick Fagan; 02-15-2009 at 05:10 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Grammar

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin