Nikkor 28-100 F/3.5-5.6 G AF Zoom Lens

Guys,

 

Have any of you used this lens (Nikon 28-100 F/3.5-5.6 G AF Zoom

Lens) before ? I was planning on buying a new Nikon SLR and a 28-105

zoom (Nikon - 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 D). The guy at the local Ritz shop

told me that Nikon has come up with this new lens. Now, i am not sure

which one to go for.

 

Any advice to this effect would be very welcome. Also any info as to

how the 28-100 stacks up against the 28-105, in real life performance

would also be very helpful.

 

Thanks.

 

Deb

The G series lack an aperture ring which means that you can't use them on manual focus bodies (and possibly some older Nikon AF bodies?). The G series also takes in about half the light at the 100mm end (1 stop less). The D lens is probably better (or less) glass.

 

If you are taking snapshots, you may never notice the difference, but if you want great quality, the 28-105 D is probably worth the difference in price.

This lens is pretty much nikons cheapest lens - there is a reason why. If you want a good standard lens here are my sugestions.

 

50mm F1.8

24-85mm AFS F3.5-F4.5

28-105mm which you are looking at is also very good.

 

Personally I would choose the 24-85mm lens if it where me.

Go with the 28-105 AFD. Sharp, good contrast, and very low distortion over

the entire zoom range.

If the guy at Ritz recommends the 28-100 G lens you should know right there that you want the 28-105 you were planning on. Enough said.

Probably you would actually notice the difference between the

28-100 and 28-105 even in 4x6 snapshots, unless you have a

very bad lab. I confess I haven't used the 28-100, but I did use a

lens in a similar class, the now-discontinued 28-80/3.5-5.6D,

and now am the happy owner of the 28-105/3.5-4.5D. When

using decent film & developing, there is a clearly noticeable

difference in colour rendition, sharpness and general "snap"

between the two, in favour of the 28-105. If you shoot mostly in

bright sunlight at f/8 or f/11, the difference is probably minor, but

for most other situations you'll be _much_ happier with the

28-105. So, IMHO the choice is fairly simple: if you cannot afford

the better lens, the 28-100 will be "okay" and serve you well, but if

it's within your price range the 28-105 is a _great_ all-around

lens.

 

Oh, and if you have some spare change after buying it, add a

50/1.8D for those low-light situations where the zoom will be too

slow...

 

Regards, //Kenneth

I use this lens every day. It's pretty cheesy and plasticy, but the pictures are surprisingly good. I would have gone for the 24-85 if it was out at the time. The macro feature- at least on my lens- is unusable. Very poor images & a pain to use.