Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by raffal, Jun 25, 2013.

  1. Any thoughts about Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 ? - picture samples / any place outside eBay where this lens can be purchased. thanks.raf
  2. pge


    This lens is a great alternative to the much more expensive f2.8 zooms. Some find that the push-pull zoom is a bit strange. I don't mind it but it is my only lens with this style of zoom and it does take some getting used to. I bought mine off of Craig's website (can't say the name here I guess) and got a great price.
  3. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I have had this lens since 1990. A common problem is that an internal element would fog up. That happened to mind in 2002. I never had that repaired.
    Optically it is an excellent lens. I don't particularly like its limited zoom range. The subsequent 28-70mm/f2.8 AF-S and 24-70mm/f2.8 AF-S have far more convenient zoom ranges.
    I bought mine off of Craig's website (can't say the name here I guess)​
    Why? Craig's List and eBay are not forbidden words here. We don't like links to eBay because we don't want people to promote their auctions here.
  4. pge


    Craig's List is apparently not forbidden, but it spellout out as one word is, even without the .com as I just learned while posting above.
  5. "A common problem is that an internal element would fog up." - if this happens , can it be fixed and how?
  6. Rafal: I got one of these for an absurdly low price on The Auction Site™. It is an excellent lens. A little prone to flare (you will need a hood), but very sharp and solidly built. Mine is absolutely fog and haze free. If you do have this problem, Nikon can fix it.
  7. I've owned a Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D lens since 1998. At the time of purchase this lens was Nikon's "top-drawer" 35mm mid-range zoom lens intended for pro and serious non-pro markets. The lens performance is close to the prime lens of 35-70mm range produced during that period. It's a very sharp lens.
    The lens is a push-zoom design, which was used extensively by Nikon/Nikkor at one time, but is obviously unconventional today. It's built like a tank, and its weight obviously reflects the design (15 elements) needed to achieve the range and maximum aperture, as well as its intended usage by professional photographers.
    My lens has never exhibited any problems with fogging, and I wasn't personally aware that this was an issue with samples of these lenses. The biggest problem usually attributed to the lens is that it is prone to flare with off-axis lighting. The use of the lens hood (HB-1) is definitely recommended.
    Given the very reasonable prices of these lens today, especially in comparison to the later 24-70 and 28-70mm f/2.8 Nikkor lens, I think the 35-70mm lens is a bargain. Other opinions may vary, obviously.
  8. For little more than the price of that used 35-70 AF Nikkor you could buy a new 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron SP Di lens. Just a thought.
  9. I have one, bought used, BGN from KEH. No element fogging yet (knock wood) and I like it very much. It's usually the lens on my D700.
  10. I bought a 35-70/F2.8 back in the mid to late 90's for around $650 for use on an N70 and F100. Great lens. I remember one photo I took at a basketball game for young kids where the lens was at F2.8 and towards the 35mm end of the lens that was a bit soft. I don't normally shoot with the lens at 2.8 but I noticed that image was a bit soft. Still good though. That is the only bad thing I can say about the quality of the lens.
    The only other issue I have had is that 35mm is not quite wide enough. I was just on the USS North Carolina and I was using the 35-70 lens because it was so handy for that environment. In some places, 24mm was needed and I had to switch over to my 24mm/F2.8.
    This lens is my "traveling" lens and for many years my only zoom lens. I have thought about buying a new lens that is 24mm or 28mm on the wide end but I can't justify spending the money.
    The lens has taken worked just fine on the N70, F100, D200, D700, and now a D800. Pretty danged good bang for the buck after almost 20 years of usage.
  11. I bought this lens used and I can follow the indications given about its quality, and mine has no fogging issues.
    One aspect other participants didn't refer is its closeup possibilities, using the "macro" position.
    This lens was Nikon's flagship professional midrange zoom for some years and the quality is still there if you can live with AF-D instead of the faster AF-S focusing speed.
    35 mm in the short end may look a bit long for some people but it will depend on which lens you pair it with, if you need a shorter focal (having a 16-35 mm, it is no problem for me).
  12. Rodeo Joe [​IMG], Jun 25, 2013; 01:27 p.m.
    For little more than the price of that used 35-70 AF Nikkor you could buy a new 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron SP Di lens. Just a thought.
    Better yet the Tokina 28-70 f2.8 for even less.
  13. Then again, you could pair the 35-70 with a Tokina ATX 19-30 f2.8 AF and have an even wider low end. that's one thing I have been thinking of myself...
  14. Rafal, I've no personal experience with this lens but I think I read somewhere that it was a favourite of Playboy Photographer David Chan. Seems to have worked OK for him. :) Best, LM.
  15. Mine was good if stopped down a little, very good at 5.6. I wound up selling it since it never got used. Something like a 24-85 AF-S on the camera with a fast 50 in a pocket is a more versatile setup, IMO.
  16. I had an internal element replaced on mine due to fungus, not fog. Now it is fungus free.
    It is an excellent lens and makes a very good portrait lens in the DX format.
    Only negative is the push pull design, IMO.

Share This Page