long time Nikon user, new D70 owner few questions

[andrew_schank]

First of all, I have to admit making a very foolish error a few months

back. I was all set to purchase a D70 online, but thought I should

look at one locally first before I buy it. I was in the "good guys"

store and saw one on display. No one was there to help me out, so I

picked it up and looked the finder and was appalled at the dark,

grainy image. I had no idea you had to have a battery in there or

that is how the finder looked. I posted how crappy the finder was a

few months back and wondered how anyone could use the camera. How the

battery improves the optical finder, I have no idea.

 

Anyway, I just got the camera and am loving it and the 18 to 70 lens

is great.

 

Few questions:

 

Anyone else notice some 35mm Nikon AF lenses don't seem to work as

well on the D70 as their film camera, and other work amazing? I have

a Sigma 70 210 ED zoom that is very sharp with film, and only so so

with this camera. My 90mm Sigma macro AF lens worked fine though. The

300 f4.0 ED Nikkor looks great, and my trusty 50mm 1.8 AF lens is

unbelievable on this camera-seems even better than on film. But My 24

to 120 Nikkor AFD lens didn't produce images on the D70(to my eye at

least) as well as it does on my N90s.

 

How does the 180 f2.8 ED AF lens work on the D70? any other stand

out lenses that seem to just match the sensor best?

 

 

Does a standard width polarizer vignette the kit lens at 17 mm.

Which af mode are you using for general shooting?

 

Thanks in advance

[ilkka_nissila]

The 180 is excellent on the D70. Other lenses which I like to use on it are the 20/2.8, the 35/2 (excellent), 50/1.8, 105/2 DC. They all give great results on the D70.

[vivek iyer]

Best lenses from my use (in this order, roughly):

 

1. 50-135 f/3.5 zoom

 

2. 75-150mm f/3.5 E-series zoom

 

3. 50mm f/1.8 AF Nikkor

 

4. 105mm DC Nikkor

 

5. 50-300mm f/4.5 ED zoom

 

6. Micronikkors (all of them).

 

There are a few other non Nikon lenses that rank high up there.

 

What does not do as well as in film are:

 

105mm f/2.5 AI

 

and a whole bunch of others..

 

About your other questions...

 

Even without any filter, the kit zoom vignettes itself at the low end (18mm BTW not 17mm).

[kelly_flanigan1]

The 105mm f/2.5 is a fine lens. what is the problem when using it on a D70? This lens has been used in 35mm movie cameras; ie the lens block has been used. Here the sharpness criteria are well beyond still 35mm film.

[vivek iyer]

I just don't like the 105/2.5 on my D70. It performs wonderfully with film on my F2.

 

The 105 f/2 DC Nikkor is a much sharper lens and matches the D70 better.

[scott_warn]

First off, congrats, you got a great camera and were brilliant in choosing the 18-70. it's a great optical bargain, isn't it? I wish that Nikon put these optics in a pro style mount, I for one would be willing to part with 600 or 700 USD for it.

 

Second, the DX format imposes a higher demand for quality on lenses than 35mm film. That crop factor means that every print is enlarged an additional 1.5 times for each print size. Granted, your only enlarging the central part of the frame but it's still a big factor in the final sharpness. You also have to keep in mind that most computer displays can result in a 100% crop being a piece of a 20x30 inch, or larger, enlargement, it's not uncommon for a 35mm lens to show some softness at these levels. We don't normally view this large of a print this closely. Last, you have to keep in mind the file format your viewing, try shooting identical subjects with JPG and RAW and you will see an obvious difference (I use Capture for RAW). I "rate" my lenses by how large a print I can make without it looking soft.

 

Note, some of the lenses on the following list are manual focus and some had to be "safed" for use on the D70. Be careful about trying out manual focus lenses because the early style lenses can BREAK your D70. If you don't know what to look for, just stick with AF lenses or, the Nikon AI lenses that have 2 rows of aperture numbers ENGRAVED on the aperture rings (paper lables don't count, the engraved rings were made by Nikon and are a sure way to know the lens is safe).

 

My list for the sharpest lenses that I have used with the D70, in a sort of objective order. #1 - 105mm Micro Nikkor, you really MUST use RAW to evaluate how sharp this lens really is. #2 - the 180mm f2.8 EDIF, 50mm f2 Nikkor HC (old MF with AI conversion Kit), and 85mm f1.8 are a tie and close to the 105 Micro. # 3 - the ties list gets a little longer, 18-70mm Kit zoom, 24mm f2.8, 300mm f5.6 Tamron Adaptal, and 45mm GN Nikkor (another AI kit conversion and a very tricky beast to focus accurately because of the non linear cam, but very sharp when well focused). All of these lenses are capable of stunning 11x17 inch prints and excellent 16x24 inch prints.

 

Now for the lenses that produce an excellent to very good 11x17 inch print. My 50mm f1.4 AF-D Nikkor (at apertures of f2.8 and smaller, it's a bit soft wide open which works for portraits) and my 135mm f3.5 Nikkor (an ancient manual focus that I had to "safe" for the D70). I suspect the first design 105 f2.5 would probably fall into this category, my only sample is in the RF mount and I don't have an adapter.

 

The list of also rans is not very long. My 35-105mm AF-D Zoom Nikkor, good for a 5x7 at best but a great paperwieght. A 400mm f6.3 Soligor from the early 70's, it's very good at 8x10 inches but shows obvious flare at any larger print size, what can I say it was a 30 dollar experiment, for the right setting the flare can be a benefit. I also have a garage sale 80-200mm Quantaray that I would only recomend for driving nails, it's a lousy hammer but an even worse lens, flare is evident and it's soft, even on a 4x6 inch print.

 

I find that the 18-70 is so good, and so versatile, that I probably use it for 75% of my photos. Because of this, I am now thinking about supplementing it with another zoom and packing a lighter kit. Nikon has just announced a 55-200mm DX zoom that I may try out, either that or break the bank with the 80-400mm VR. I used to be a "prime only" snob, the 18-70 changed my mind about that. Primes have their uses (low light and narrow DOF effects) but the zoom lenses today are good enough for any use that doesn't require a "fast" lens. I would suggest that you give your 24-120 another chance, try having a 11x17, or 16x20, print made and see if it's good enough, you may be pleasently surprized.

[joseph_wisniewski]

Andrew, I'll answer the question you didn't quite ask...

 

There's a special form of LCD, called a "guest-host LCD", just above the focusing screen on the D70 and D100. The GH LCD has the "on demand" gridlines and the 5 focus zone indicators on it.

 

Without power, it's gray, and scatters light. With power, in one polarity iy's crystal clear, and in the other polarity it's black. That's how they get the focus zone indicators and gridlines to show, without impacting the quality of the display.

[andrew_schank]

Major thanks to all the usefull and inteligently written responses. Been a while since I have been on photo.net--I was a regular a few years back (well, maybe it is more than a few years at this point) The reason for the screen brightness needing batteries was especially interesting.

 

I think the kit lens is and my 50mm f1.8 are both superb, and this may be why some other lenses didn't seem as impressive. The magnification factor makes a lot of sense as well: smaller pickup=more magnification to get to a particular size screen enlargement. I had thought since I was using the center portion of the lenses, the images might show higher sharpness than on film, but I see the error in my thinking. I bet that is why the macro lenses look good as well--they tend to be slower apertures and highly corrected and super sharp. (my old F2 vintage micro nikkor P was my all time resolution champ)

 

Those of you using the manual focus lenses, any tips? Are you metering with a differnet lens first to get exposure, or just guessing and checking the playback image? Using a hand held meter? I took a few photos with my old trusty Factory AI'd 55mm Micro Nikkor P today, and they did look sharp. Unbelievably sharp as a matter of fact. I used the same exposures I got from the AF lens I just took off the camera and the images looked fine-I checked them on the screen playback to be sure. I guess if you are doing fast style shooting, the manual focus lenses would be clumsy compared to ones designed to sync up with the camera's brain. Still is nice to be able to use them in a pinch. I just sold some lenses I really didn't use at all anymore to help finance the D70. Sure is a buyers market for quality manual focus lenses now. Prices must be less than half what they were just 4 years ago.

[terry_rory]

I guess that in terms of compatibility the most logical manual focus lens to get would be the 45mm f/2.8 P (pancake) but the Tessar plan lenses are an acquired taste (I like 'em) and the 45mm focal length would result in a 1.5x equivalent of 67.5mm which could be odd. (Neither Tele not 'normal')

[haris]

I would not recommend using AF lenses for metering and then switching to MF for a picture. The main issue I have with this approach is dust--changing lenses back and forth invites this problem and while cleaning the sensor is not that big of a deal, it's not worth it for me. This is minor, but I also believe that not all f/4 are created equal and even when they are the internals of the lense and coating may lead to a significant translucence differences. Don't also forget that outside the studio the light tends to change quite often. If histogram is not enough, a light meter is a more elegant solution, but I am not thinking aobut purchasing one since a few wasted shots on the digital camera don't amount to anything. Guesstimate the exposure, take a shot, look at the histogram. If it's a keeper, go on shooting, if it's not where you want it to be, press "Delete" twice and all you've done is lose a couple of seconds. This sounded a lot more complicated before I tried it. It became second nature really fast and I don't even think about it anymore. Of course, this is not the most elegant approach is your subject is moving/changing. I don't know how do deal with that kind of a situation with a MF-D70 combination. One has to give...

 

As for the sharpness, no one mentioned the fact that film and digital sensor are very different in rendering detail. Film grain is pretty much round while the pixels are square. If the particles are of roughly the same size, it is a whole lot easier to get sharp looking images out of round shapes than it is out of square ones. Fortunately, there's help but you absolutely HAVE to sharpen your images in-camera or in post-processing if sharpness is your ultimate goal. See RealWorld Photoshop books--the authors explain this concept very clearly.

[aardvarko]

It seems as though once you shoot in full-manual for long enough, the meter becomes just an aid to exposure, rather than a necessity.

[vivek iyer]

Yes, I agree with that fully. It becomes easy to use the MF lenses without the matrix chip once you get accustomed to it.

 

On the GN-Nikkor use: it is better to have a good strong filter on it to block UV and some IR if you are planning to to use it on the D70.

With extension rings, the GN-Nikkor performs very well as well. I use this lens for UV photography (even for close ranges).