Checking Nikon Lens

I won, from an eBay auction, one Nikon AF Nikkor 28-85mm/f3.5-5.6 D

Zoom lens. This purchase was back in April. I wasn't entirely happy

with the lens when it arrived. There is dust in the optics and the

zoom mechanism seems to be rough and a bit dry. Plus it has plastic

for a mount, not stainless or plated brass like my other AF Nikkors.

When on the camera, it seems to focus fine but for some reason goes

out of focus on the extreme end range of the zoom. It also has a

tendency to not want to zoom correctly, i.e. not travelling the full

zoom range. I did not mess with trying to get a refund or return the

item, didn't pay that much for it and it was the very first thing I

had won, didn't want to get off to a bad start on eBay, although I

did in a way.

I have a Nikon 4004s, Christmas gift 1989. I have the usual

50f/1.8mm, came with camera, and 35-70f/3.3-4.5 Zoom, bought in

1991. In May, I won a Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300/f4-5.6 ED Zoom, 1998,

off of eBay. This lens works great with my 4004s.

I am wondering, especially after reveiwing a few thing here on

photo.net, if Nikon has camera lineage issues as well as lens legacy

issues? It is clear that this 28-85 zoom wasn't made for my camera's

generation, being of the 4004/8008/F4 line. Has anyone run into lens

compatibilty problem along Nikon lineage? Are there certain series

of lenses that do not work with certain groups of cameras?

From what I have observed personally and have read on photo.net,

there might be, but it has not been specifally addressed. My

thinking is this, as long as I can find the lenses listed specially

in my manuals, brochures, and books on the 4004s/8008s/F4s I'll be

fine.

<i>

It is clear that this 28-85 zoom wasn't made for my camera's generation, being of the 4004/8008/F4 line.</I>

<p>

Well, since it's a 'D' lens, it probably was offered later than the cameras you cite. Still, it would be considered an appropriate lens for your camera. Don't confuse cheap (i.e. plastic lens mount) and mistreated (dust, focus errors, stiff zoom) for not being compatible somehow with your camera.

<p>

The question you perhaps aren't asking but are dancing around is 'How can I tell if a lens is a cheap consumer lens by the description?' This is tougher. Sometimes you can tell by the asking price, sometimes you have to dig deeper at places like photo.net. Note that some of these 'cheap consumer lenses' can have decent optical quality if they haven't been knocked around.

<p>

To be sure, there are some lens compatibility issues in the Nikon line. If your camera body does not have the ability to adjust the aperture (command dial), you can't make full use a 'G' lens. Conversely, if your camera body doesn't have the mechanical aperture follower linkage, you can't meter with any lens that doesn't have a 'chip' in it (most MF lenses). Older (pre-AI) MF lenses can't be mounted on later MF and AF cameras without damaging the aperture follower (there are exceptions).

<p>

There are resources out on the web like this one:<br>

<a href="http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/bodylens.htm">http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/bodylens.htm</a><br>

that try to spell it all out.

Todd is correct. The lens should work fine on your camera. It is just not a very good quality lens but it is the quality for its original cost. It is a starter lens that goes mostly with a kit. I think I might have one somewhere in my group but I don't remember how it came my way. I think it was given to me -- I know I didn't buy it. I have an acquaintance who takes his photography very seriously who shoots with this lens and gets good enough results. (The problems with his photographs are not from the lens.)

Most of the people who have this lens bought it as a starter lens and I would dare say that the majority of them will not need anything more. Then there are the rest of us! These lenses do serve a useful purpose. It's just not likely to be our purpose.

Conni

Sorry, I misidentified the lens, it is a Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm/f3.5-5.6 D. S/N:US2570514. I thought I could achieve alittle extra zoom range and angle with this lens. I had done a search on Photo.net on this lens with limited results. I did get the message to avoid the "G" series lenses like the plague. I even searched B&H Photo for information on the lens. US Market for this lens was priced at $109 and grey market was $99. The US market lens was not available, possible discontinued. I tried to get extra angle cheaply and paid the price by doing so, $75.

I am more or less putting my SLR system together by a list I made for myself some 12 years ago when I was on a college budget. I'm still on a budget in a way. But I have since done more research into lenses and cameras since this purchase was made. I have the Magic Lantern Guide to Nikon Lenses, 2nd. Ed. In it I found my other lenses listed, with approval by the author. The AF Nikkor 50mm/1.8 as excellent fixed lens for a budget price. The AF Nikkor 70-300mm/f4-5.6 ED as excellent zoom in a small package, again for a small price. The 35-70mm/f3.3-4.5 wasn't listed in the guide, its replacement, the 35-80 was. Its a good casual lens, but for serious photography, get the 2.8. One thing it does have, macro. More than likely, I will purchase "Pro Lenses", over time in the future, using my Magic Lantern guide and photo.net for research before purchase.

I have not liked what I have read about the newer Nikons (N65, N70, F100, F5) after my camera's lineage (4004s, 8008s, F4). My father has a 6006, circa 1992, and I have read where there have been lineage issues about that camera's replacement. Also, a friend of mine is constantly comparing new vs. old and Canon vs. Nikon. Results here will help him and me both.

And you are correct, I do not shoot roll after roll, every day. I tend to shoot sporadically. I have done photos on work projects, I'm an Jr. Engineer with a local Die Casting facility. I have done some sports photos, for myself, of the local amatuer hockey team. I even have some interesting storm photography. I should propably post some of the better ones. Not having a true pro camera store in Temple, I would need to go to Waco or Austin, or order online, Kodak Max and Fuji Superia are my choice for 400 and 800 speed film locally. I have noticed the Fuji Superia shoots better at 800 than the Kodak Max. Quite frankly I miss Extar 1000 and 400. Shot about 50 rolls of it over the years, when I could get it. And here is something that will make you cringe, I finally developed, in January of this year, a roll of Max 400 that had been in my camera for 5 years, as well as a roll I had shot in 1998. I sent them to the Kodak Lab in Dallas through my local HEB minilab. They came out great, I was shocked.

My HEB minilab has also done good work for me. I sent some rolls through HEB and through Kodak, and could not tell the difference. My HEB lab is using Kodak Royal Paper and Kodak chemicals in a Fuji machine set to C-41 process. I do know this much, the one running the machine makes a differnce. If Rebecka or Ken are on duty, I get great results. If one of the store managers is over there, forget it.

Thanks for the responses, more are welcome.

Hi Charlie,

I had the 28-80 f/3.5-5.6D as well for a short while. I was using a Nikon FA manual focus, so I had a few problems with the lens. The focusing ring rotates quite loosely (for fast AF). So each time I released the focusing ring after focusing, it would go out of focus. But once in a while I would be lucky and the ring did not move and the photos produced were quite sharp. I know the plastic lens mount is disheartening, but give it a shot first. I guess quality control might be worse compared to higher end lenses, but for its price, it's a swell lens. So far I've only found lineage issues with non-Ai'd lenses with current bodies...

Regards,

Aaron

Charlie, I used to have a 28-80 AF-D zoom. I bought it, and the similarly cheap 80-200 variable aperture AF-D zoom, and an N6006 body back in the mid-1990s.

Both zooms are featherweight, plastic critters. They always felt as if they were just about to break, but neither ever broke. The zoom controls were scratchy and poorly damped. The manual focus rings felt loose, sloppy and scratchy too. But image quality is the most important measuring stick for a lens, yes? My sample of the 28-80 was pretty sharp at f/8 to f/16. My 80-200 was less impressive, producing soft images wide open and improving only a little when stopped down.

What I'm trying to say is the tactile aspects of the 28-80 that disappoint you may not be evidence of abuse or even malfunction. That lens was designed to feel lousy right out of the box on Day One. If it gives you good pictures, you might consider ignoring the build-quality issues. If the zoom or focus functions actually seem to be defective -- if they actually don't work -- there's no reason to hang onto it. Chuck it and get one of the 245 other 28-xx zooms in the Nikkor lineup.

As for film, you can get the "good stuff" for pretty low prices out of Adorama or B&H photo in New York, but then there's the shipping charge. If you need any other camera bits (filter, hood, strap, case, flash, tripod... whatever) and order through the New York stores, getting a few months' worth of film in the same order can be awfully cost-effective.

Have fun,

Don't sell your little 35-70 3.3-4.5 short. It's a really sharp, lightweight little lens. It was one of the first two lenses I bought and it was not a mistake. I still have it. As I said, it is sharp, small and goes on a manual camera pretty well, too.

The cameras you listed as not being "impressed" with are almost all excellent, especially the F5, F100, and F/N70. The others are good for their intended purpose.

There is something I think gets overlooked. Back when the 6006, etc. came out, it was not as common for "just about anybody" to think in terms of owning an SLR. Those were for "serious photographers" and it wasn't until later, with greater prosperity afoot as well as education that more people became interested in entry level cameras. With technical advances, more thought they could own and use such cameras. So we get older models that people think were so great (some were) but they were not really aimed at the same mass market that's the mass market we see today. The entry level cameras out there right now are meeting the needs of the segment they are intended to serve. That market isn't us, and we forget that most SLR users are never going to go beyond their Rebel or N55/65. Their interest isn't that deep but they are very happy with them. Do they meet our needs? Probably not. But they were not intended to.

I keep an N60 and the lens you just bought on that auction site to use as a loaner. I have friends who borrow it for family reunions, christenings, birthdays, etc. When they ask, they really have no idea how much such a unit costs. For them it's "just a camera" and not difficult to use. I don't want it destroyed but I can loan it to those I know and trust without anxiety. And I use it sometimes when it suits the timing and purpose.

Conni

To all who have answered, Thank you.

I did a few tests today with the Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm/f3.5-5.6 D Zoom lens today.

1.)Focusing ring a bit loose on manual focus, to free moving for me.

2.) Zoom functioned through full range just fine. I don't understand why it stuck before on the extreme ends of the zoom range or was stiff.

3.) Lens functioned and focused normally on all marked settings, 28,35,50,80mm, at distances less than 20 feet. At 80mm, the lens will not focus and shuts down the camera, will not release shutter, on anything over 20 feet away. You can get it to shoot the frame by switching to manual focus. However, it will not focus properly beyond a 70mm setting, on anything over 20 feet.

My AF Nikkor 35-70mm/3.3-4.5 is by far a superior lens. I paid $137 for it back in 1991. It has macro to infinity through the full range, 35 to 70 mm. I have never seen a lens that would not focus to infinity on long distance shots. Until I got the AF Nikkor 70-300mm/f4-5.6 D ED, the 35-70 was my big lens.

This 28-80 Zoom is definately cheap lens made for comsumers who have no idea what they are looking at or for. I guess I should throw it back on eBay and resell it. Might not get full money back on it, but maybe someone might have a camera perfectly mated for this POS Lens. It is not fully functional on my old trusty 4004s, which was considered entry level when it was made. At least the lenses made for it were TRUE "PRO Grade" AF Nikkor, usable accross all Nikon cameras, without any problems.

Again, I feel there is a legacy issue with certain groupings of lens and different series of camera body familys. Maybe there is a reason some camera shop owners and pros here on photo.net still have a glint in thier eye at the mention of Nikon F4 or 8008, of which the 4004 was the baby of the family. They were built better then and have the reputation to back it up. The lenses built for them are the same way as well, built better and more reliable, pro equipment, worthy of the Nikon name.

Granted, many of the lenses made back in 1989 thru 1992 have been replaced by updated lenses, some so they would work with newer cameras, but they are still good lenses. Also, many were replaced by a next generation, that again, are good lenses. But there were definately some added to the line that should have resulted in the canning of some Nikon employees, those lenses were and are crap. I should know, I found one.