Nikkor Widest Range Zoom Lens

[frankie_frank1]

Which one is Nikkor's widest range zoom lens? Why Nikkor doesn't make

SLR zoom lens as wide range as it does for Coolpix 8800 (10X)? I

prefer to carry only one zoom lens for vacation/trip.

[klaus_klein]

Nikon's biggest (zoom ratio) lens at present would be the 28-200mm

f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED. I have no personal experience with it to share,

however.

[Ed_Ingold]

The Nikon 24-120/4.5-5.6 or 28-200/4.5-5.6 come closest to your desire for a one-lens travel kit. The 24-120 is also available as a VR lens, which is very effective in reducing camera shake.

 

Why not a 10:1 zoom? It is hard to maintain optical quality the longer the zoom range, to control distortion and maintain focus. The very best zooms for 35mm film are about 2:1 (e.g., the 28-70/2.8). It is less expensive to make smaller lenses for smaller sensors, like the 8800, but it's just as likely that the expectations are less for a point-and-shoot camera than a DSLR.

 

You can get zoom lenses from third-party manufacturers with much longer zoom ranges. Oddly, they cost less than comparable Nikon lenses. Maybe it's something to do with performance and build quality.

 

Everything is a compromise. You get what you pay for.

[andrew robertson]

Wider range zoom lenses are usually poorer performers than narrower range zooms. The

widest range zooms are almost universally poor. Nikon doesn't make lenses with that

wide of a range because they'd be terrible!

[hsksla_ddygff]

lest we forget the mighty 50-300mm ais nikon.

[richard_cochran]

<cite>Why Nikkor doesn't make SLR zoom lens as wide range as it does for Coolpix 8800 (10X)?</cite>

<p>

You might rephrase that as why DO they make such a wide range zoom

for the Coolpix?

<p>

Zoom lens design is easier for smaller low-res formats. A 10X zoom

is not unusual for a digicam with a small sensor, or for a TV or movie

camera with low resolution and a smaller format.

<p>

For a full-frame 35mm, a 10x zoom lens would be distortion-prone,

big, expensive, and the end result pictures would be not much

better than the pictures you get with the Coolpix. If you

like the Coolpix so much, why don't you just carry it all

the time? It's even easier to carry on vacation than a big

SLR.

[ShunCheung]

Well, digicams need a zoom with a wider range because that is the one lens you are stuck with. On SLRs, it is better to change lenses. If you don't like to change lenses, it defeats one of the main reasons (if not THE reason) to have an SLR.

[frankie_frank1]

Richard Cochran wrote: Zoom lens design is easier for smaller low-res formats. A 10X zoom is not unusual for a digicam with a small sensor, or for a TV or movie camera with low resolution and a smaller format. For a full-frame 35mm, a 10x zoom lens would be distortion-prone, big, expensive, and the end result pictures would be not much better than the pictures you get with the Coolpix.

 

-------

 

Yes, it is easier to design a 10X zoom lens for a low resolution sensor, but Coolpix 8800 is not a low resolution sensor. It has 8MP. For a small sensor camera, the burden is even heavier on the lens. It will be harder to design a 10X zoom lens for a high pixel, small sensor camera.

[briany]

Though I agree the zoom multiple is probably the best definition of "widest range" you could also go for <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/speciallenses/12001700mm.htm">this baby</a> with its 500mm zoom range. Less than practical, however. But you won't hear its users complaining of the weight of, well, anything else.

[andrew robertson]

There are rare exceptions like the 50-300 Nikkor and Canon FD lenses. But they're huge,

heavy, and expensive.

[frank_skomial]

I disagree with general statement like: "Nikon doesn't make lenses with that wide of a range because they'd be terrible!"

 

The Nikkor latest design 28-200 G, D, ED, IF AF lens is an excellent optical performer. Has 3 ED elements, 3 aspherical elements, close focus, Nikon coating. It is nearly a 7X zoom. I printed 13 x 19" prints from this lens that rival prints from Nikkor 85/1.4 or 180/2.8 primes. It just needs better photographer or a tripod to shot at longer focal length and in low light, since the lens is not fast at 200 (5.6).

[joelgould]

As previously mentioned, the 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G is your answer. I used one of these as my primary lens for my D70 on my last vacation to St. Vincent and the Grenadines and was very happy with its flexibility and weight.

 

If you want to see samples, my travel journal is at http://www.gouldhome.com/Travel/Grenadines04/. There is a link to the photo gallery at the bottom of the page.

 

I used the lens almost exclusively outdoors in daylight so I did not suffer much from the slower speed. But, if you browse the gallery, you will see examples from both ends of the zoom range as well as (almost) macro shots.

 

(Warning: the underwater shots and some of the early above water shots were taken with a different camera. Each picture should say what camera was used. Also, most of the pictures were taken in find JPEG mode, not raw. It was a long trip.)

 

Joel Gould

http://www.gouldhome.com/

[akira_sasaki1]

Be careful what you wish for. Canon has the 28-300 zoom which is a monster (1.7kg) with price tag to match ($2200). Even if Nikon makes the equivalent lens of Coolpix 8800 for a SLR, would you want it? Or afford it?