Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,316   Posts: 1,536,743   Online: 1054
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40
  1. #1
    denmark.yuzon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Pedro, Laguna, Philippines
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    116

    Decent Zoom Lens : Nikon FM2n/F3/FE-2

    Ive been on the look out for a decent zoom lens that is wide enough at the same time, not too long... Ive been offered a MF Nikkor Zoom 35-105 f/3.5, and its a bargain.. but ive read some reviews that its not that sharp...

    recently I've found one that covers the length i want.. a Nikon Mount Vivitar 28-105 f/2.8.. and its cheap too, though i cant find any reviews here for that lens.. and im leaning towards the vivitar, though i know its not a nikon, but, it covers the length i want, and at the same time, its wider than the nikkor zoom... f/3.5 vs f/2.8?

    i like to take photos at night and out in the streets... so larger openings is a plus.. sometimes, only sometimes, i find my 50mm f/1.8 limiting... but its sharp as hell...

    you guys have any other suggestions? any third party lens i have to look out for?

    i like primes too, but i have a limited budget, and i want a flexible lens that i can zoom in on my subject and take wide angle shots too... and Ive seen a nikkor 28-105 too.. but it costs an arm and a leg... two arms and two legs in fact..
    Flickr
    Multiply
    My PhotoBlog
    My Twitter!


    WTB: Konica Autoreflex T3 and AR lenses

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    I've got a copy of that Vivtar. I'm not too thrilled with it. I'm spoiled by the results I get from my primes.
    Frank Schifano

  3. #3
    denmark.yuzon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Pedro, Laguna, Philippines
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by fschifano View Post
    I've got a copy of that Vivtar. I'm not too thrilled with it. I'm spoiled by the results I get from my primes.
    really? so its a bad buy then... whew, almost bought the glass yesterday.. so you would say the 35-105 would be ok? or should i keep my eyes open for other options? i trust nikkor lenses, but if theres any third party lenses out there that are of the same quality and much cheaper, then i would not hesitate buying it..
    Flickr
    Multiply
    My PhotoBlog
    My Twitter!


    WTB: Konica Autoreflex T3 and AR lenses

  4. #4
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,834
    Images
    29
    I have the 35 - 105 zoom lens, I bought it new about 1983 as a single travel lens. Good compact lens with a limited macro facility, but the lens is soft.

    Vivitar lens of the same period were very good if they are the "Series 1" range I had a Vivitar Series 1 135 f2.3 (I think) which was excellent, I don't know about Vivitar zoom lenses though.

    I haven't used my 35 - 105 lens in about 20 years, last year I lent it to a student who only had a 50mm 1.8, she thought it was wonderful for everything, except it wasn't too sharp.

    Mick.

  5. #5
    titrisol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,671
    Images
    8
    The Nikkor should be fine, check for a review here
    I have yet to find a "dog" Nikkor.

    If the Vivitar is a Series1 is really good.
    I have the non-seies1 vivitars and they are decent, specially in the 70+mm range.

    Try searching for the Tokinas, they were outstanding and there was a 28-80 to die for.
    Mama took my APX away.....

  6. #6
    kivis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    South Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    214
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    8
    Anybody ever used the Nikon 35-70/f2.8? Right now my zoom lens is my Nikkor 50mm/f1.4 and my feet!!
    Akiva S.

    Nikkormat FTN, Nikon F, Nikon FE, Leica M3

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/kshapero/

    My Blog



  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,103
    I have a lot to say about these lenses, but I'll keep it short. Nikon's fixed-aperture 35-70 lenses are good but you could just as easily foot-zoom with a 50 (as kivis suggests above). I have used the Vivitar Series 1 28-105 and I think it stinks, the image quality was acceptable for the school paper where I encountered it. The Nikon 35-105 and 35-135 lenses have mixed reviews and think they are only a little better than the Vivitar. The 28-85 or 28-70 Nikkors might be a good choice if you don't mind the variable aperture. Also, Tamron made 35-105 and 28-105 f/2.8 fixed aperture lenses which were quite pricey when new, probably they are good optics.

  8. #8
    rosey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    Images
    3
    I own and use two of those 35-105 AIS Nikkors. They are both very, very sharp up to 8x10 prints. I use them on an FM, FE2, FA, FG and N2000.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    England
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    534
    Images
    105
    This isn't perhaps a direct answer but I've found the Nikon 25-50/4 provides a wonderfully sharp wide-to-normal lens (although it would ne nice if it was f/2.8). It's a bit heavy and chunky but the results make it worthwhile. I find the ability to go to 25mm more useful than a 28mm or 35mm wide end and when I need to go beyond 50mm I find that it convenient to swap the 25-50 for my 105/2.5 prime which is incredibly sharp, fast and pretty compact. Carrying two lenses isn't too much of a hardship and since wide to normal shots are usually very different to tele shots I find it helps me to frame my view of the world depending on which lens I have on the camera. With these two lenses you get two very sharp lenses covering a good range rather than a compromised lens covering a wider range.

    Barry
    My website: Light Work

  10. #10
    Dave Swinnard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Parksville, BC Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    249
    I agree with Barry, the 25-50 and the 105 make a great walking around pair. Over the years I've found that if I'm not "seeing" wide(ish), then the 105 usually grabs what I'm looking at. I find having the few extra mm at the wide end makes a difference. Since obtaining the 25-50 a few years back the 28, 35, and 50 primes have stayed at home. I'm not making huge prints from these negs. and I haven't noticed a degradation in image quality since I started using this zoom. It might not make for a lighter bag, but it's now less cluttered and I spend less time changing lenses (it's my "vacation" kit).

    Dave

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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