Autofocus Lens recommendations

Hi all

 

I am a committed fully manual FM2 user, however following a weekend

of hectic event shooting like the idea of a more automated back-up

system for rapid-reaction photos - i.e. autofocus and auto-metering

is handy sometimes I think!

 

I'm on the verge of getting a very cheap F401 - can someone recommend

a quality zoom lens or lenses to cover a range of approximately 28mm

to about 150mm?

 

I love the quality of my prime 35mm, 50mm and 105mm Nikkors and if

there's any autofocus that comes close I'd love to know.

 

thanks in advance.

I use two zoom lenses: a 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D EDIF and a 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D IF. Stopped down to f/5.6 or so, I really can't tell the difference between these and some primes. My eye isn't terribly good, but I'd say they're both very good lenses. I'd go with a 28-105 and a 50mm f/1.8D for low light. You'd then have a pretty good AF setup for a backup and all-around travel kit.

I would consider the discontinued 28-105 Af lens and the discontinued 70-210 Af lens. I own the latter and my daughter owns the former. See this link for more summary info on these lenses. http://www.bythom.com/nikkordb.htm Joe smith

I heavily use the 28-105 f/3.5-4.fD and cannot recommend it highly enough. This 28-105 is just a spectacular "going to travel around the world and only want one lens that will do everything (landscape, macro, portrait, snapshot, street, etc.; low-light can be compensated for with film changes) very well. I've used the 24-120 f/3.5-5.6D and like it a lot (it's just a little bigger and heavier than the 28-105, takes 72mm filters vs. 62mm for the 28-105); I've read that many "pros" carry this lens. I've only borrowed the 28-200 f 3.5-5.6D, and was not that pleased with it (neither end is very impressive, particularly the 200mm end).

[i love the quality of my prime 35mm, 50mm and 105mm Nikkors and if there's any autofocus that comes close I'd love to know.]

 

AFAIK, most (but not all) AF primes are as good. On the other hand, some AF zooms are hell lot better than the MF ones. If you have the $$$$s, give AF 28-70mm 2.8 a try. I think you will be surprised.

You didn't ask, but I've owned most Nikon Autofocus cameras and I didn't much care for it. The autofocus is pretty weak. You might condider a 601 for not much more money.

The 24-50mm F3.5/4.5 AF zoom is a great sleeper lens.

F401??? That's got to be one of the worst Nikons ever made. get a F601 (6006) or better

yet an F801s (8008s).

My typing was sloppy above - what I meant to say is that I didn't care for the F401. You can get a N6006 in the US starting at $100 used and an N8008 started at $125 used.

"I've only borrowed the 28-200 f 3.5-5.6D, and was not that pleased with it (neither end is very impressive, particularly the 200mm end)."

 

Base on prior comment, seems that Nikon had a good reason to re-design the 28-200 D lens into the new G lens with 3 ED elements, 3 Aspherical elements, and close focus correction.

I use 28-200 f 3.5-5.6 ED, D, IF, AF, G lens and get stunning close head shots hand held in good light or flash. Make sure the shutter speed is fast enaugh, as that can be confused with lens lack of sharpness. The lens is very sharp, but this is not a VR lens.

 

The new lens is less expensive than the same range D older lens, but has plastic lens mount that may not last as long as metal. If you have the money, go for 70-200 2.8 VR lens.

<em>"I'm on the verge of getting a very cheap F401"

--Steve George<br>

</em><br>

If at all possible make that a Nikon F100. <br>

<br>

If you are going to buy an auto focus camera buy one with auto

focus worth using. Of all the AF Nikon bodies the only ones that

I feel have AF worth using are the F5 and F100. <br>

<br>

The F100 is a great camera for AF lens and its good for MF

lenses. Its focus screen isnt as crisp and it lacks

ADR but it weighs in at 861g with lithium batteries and a 1"

Nylon strap. On a modest budget an AF 35~70/2.8D Nikkor is a

great lens. The 2x zoom range is a bit boring but thats

what gives the lens its quality. Its up to the

photographer to put subject material in the frame thats

interesting.<br>

<br>

The F5 is a great camera for both AF and MF lenses. It do pair

the F5 with an FM2n or FE2 but you said backup and the F5 is

fairly heavy as a backup. The F5 weighs 1344g with lithium

batteries and a 1" (25mm) nylon strap. I mentioned the F5

only for comparison to the F100.<br>

<br>

<em>"I love the quality of my prime 35mm, 50mm and 105mm

Nikkors and if there's any autofocus that comes close I'd love to

know." --Steve George<br>

</em><br>

Just use these MF Nikkors on the F100. The F100 is much quieter

than the FM2n with MD-12. Its something like 67dB to 80dB.

The FE2 with MD-12 weighs in at 1083g. The FM2n with MD-12 will

probably be about 10g less and again the F100 ready to rock is

only 861g. <br>

<br>

Ill get stoned by F401 owners but I think that camera is

pretty much a has been if it ever was. For "hectic event

shooting" the F100 will rock.<br>

<br>

Best,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

Steve is planning to buy "a very cheap F401." I am wondering what his budget for the F401 is. As John Irving points out, something else in the $100+ range such as a used N8008 may be alternatives. I had an N8008 and in its days, around 1990 or so, it was a very fine camera.

 

I have no doubt that the F100 is a much better camera, but we are talking about something like $900 new and at least $600 or so used. That is several times as expensive as the very cheap F401 in the original question.

 

I think we should set up a rule in the Nikon Forum that when somebody wants to buy a (used) camera and if you suggest one that costs more than twice as much, you are responsible for the price difference. :-)

I'll second the above recommendations for the 28-105 AF - it is a great all-purpose

lens and quite sharp. With regard to the camera, however, you may want to rethink

the F401 -- the early Nikon AF cameras were pretty primative and frustrating. I'd

seriously consider an N80 -- either new (although it will be more than the F401 and

I'm afraid I can't make up the difference) or second hand (excellent condition ones

can be bought at KEH for $225). Also, here you get to the problem that AIS

lenses can't meter with the N80 -- you need AF lenses. If you can cough up enough

for a used F100, you'll be able to use AIS lenses,

but even used (excellent) an F100 is $550 or so. Another thing to consider is a MF

camera with aperature priority shooting -- like the FE-2. If you are good at focusing,

you'll find this will be quite useful for most situations, except for certain

sports.

 

Have fun!

 

Bob Y.

"I would consider the discontinued 28-105 Af lens and the discontinued 70-210 Af lens. I own the latter and my daughter owns the former. See this link for more summary info on these lenses. http://www.bythom.com/nikkordb.htm Joe smith"

 

Yes. I agree that those two lenses provide a lot of bang for the buck.

 

The F401 autofocus is very weak and the N6006 is noisy and rude. My suggestions are an N8008s, an N90s, and an F100, in that order of increasing desirability and price.

<em>"I have no doubt that the F100 is a much better

camera, but we are talking about something like $900 new and at

least $600 or so used." --Shun Cheung<br>

</em><br>

Ill almost always recommended shuffling the budget to buy a

better camera or lens. Im of the opinion that the F401 is a

waste as an AF camera. I would not even buy a Nikon F4s as an AF

camera today. <br>

<br>

I wore chipboard in my shoes for about 2 to 3 weeks to save the

maximum from my pay checks from a summer job as a printers

devil. I know this is not as bad as my father walking butt naked

in the snow 40 miles to school but I did sacrifice for my first

camera. I had to break down and have half soles put on my shoes

before going back to school. <br>

<br>

My first camera was a Nikkormat FTn with a 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P

Auto. I already knew what the bargain alternatives were. Id

used my fathers Mamiya (500, 250, whatever) with fix 50/2.8

lenses. I didnt want to compromise.<br>

<br>

Some people just cant spend more but many can rearrange

their spending even for a few months and buy better. Some spend a

lot of money on expendable or luxury items. Im sure some

people spend enough on Starbucks Coffee to buy an F100 every year.

<br>

<br>

Over a few months cutting out some luxuries can add up to the

difference between an F401 and an F100. I think Im pretty

consistent here. I recommend a older classic manual focus SLR or

the best current AF SLR depending on circumstances, preferences

and subject matter.<br>

<br>

Another possibility is just save for the next round of DSLR(s). <br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

<em>"...hectic event shooting..." --Steve George<br>

</em><br>

Are these paying jobs? Is this a business? If so a camera is a

necessary expense. The camera you prefer for personal use may not

be the best for your business use. If this is a business camera

then you should approach this as a business decision.<br>

<br>

Best,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

Dave, next time someone wants to buy a Honda Civic and you recommend a Prosche, we'll enforce the rule that you pay for the price difference. :-)