Took a look at a Nikon 55-200mm AF-S DX today.

[terry_rory]

But I could not go through with it. It felt so horribly plastic in a

really tacky way. It bore no comparison to the build and feel of the

18-70mm AF-S (itself a budget consumer 'kit' lens).

 

I dont care if it is an optical marvel if it feels like I am

scratching nails down a chalkboard every time I used it.

 

I will spend the same money on a used Contax 135mm f/2.8 Sonnar for my

film camera instead. The D70 will have to wait for a telephoto until

another day.

[eric friedemann]

Canon has the reasonably-priced, nicely-sized, well-built, optically-excellent EF 70-200mm f/4.0L lens. With Nikon, you are stuck with either the big, pricey 70-200mm f/2.8 G lens or plasticy stuff like the new 55-200mm or the 70-300mm lenses that lack AF-S focus motors. It kinda sucks.

[EricM]

too bad it's slow too...I want a 50-150 f 2.8.

 

with my film cam's it was great to have two f2.8 zooms covering the range, the 28-70 and 80-200, but with DX and an owner of the 17-55, I want the overlap of a 50-150 now. anyone know of another wonderful DXzoom coming around the corner?

[vivek iyer]

Eric, Don't wait around, find an used 50-135 f/3.5 AIS zoom. This one is sharper than many primes.

[abbilder]

Hi Eric,

 

you forgot to mention the 80-200 2.8. Its a excellent lens and costs only half the price of the 70-200 AFS VR. O.k., it lacks VR and AFS.

 

May be, one day Nikon makes a 70-200 4 VR AFS. That's what I want. The gap between 55 and 70 doesn't hurt me. You get it with one step back or forward.

 

Best wishes,

Axel

[eric friedemann]

Nikon has too many DSLRs now with slow, whiny, crappy AF that really need lenses with AF-S motors. As such, this Eric has drawn a line in the sand. I'm not going to buy another Nikon lens that lacks an AF-S focus motor. There is simply no reason for Nikon not to include such a motor on every one of its lenses.

 

 

And screw having to buy a 24mm f/2.0 AIS lens to get decent wide angle and speed or buying some other AIS lens and having to have it chipped. Nikon needs to start producing a full line of lenses that are completely compatible with Nikon's current DSLRs.

[EricM]

"Eric, Don't wait around, find an used 50-135 f/3.5 AIS zoom."

 

Vivek, I'd love that lens, but it wont work with my sound blimp.

 

I think Nikon has the ability now, with DX lenses to make fast 3x zooms. The 50-150 would be sooo niceeee!

[scott_mcloughlin]

I can't agree enough. I don't want a 70-200 on my D70. A 50-150/2.8 or thereabouts is a much more useful FL range, IMHO. And yes, USM and VR is a must.

 

In general, at this point in time, I don't think Nikon is doing a very good job of producing good lenses for the APS-C sensor to which they are so commited. It's one here, one there, some low end consumer zooms. Hell, this is supposed to be a "system camera" - well, then Nikon has to round out the system.

 

What I specificially want is:

 

- A superb, fast 30-35/1.4 with USM and VR. The DX lens system deserves a fast, dedicated normal, and the VR with help with hand holding at 1.4 and slow shutter speeds. And damn it, I want good bokeh and an MTF akin to a Summicron. I'm a big fan of the normal prime lens, and the Nikon DX lineup deserves a world beater.

 

- A "world class" (think 105/2.5 and 105/2) portrait length lens in the 60-70mm range. This would offer a 90-105 equiv. DX. With the 105's such an historical "flagship" prime in Nikon's lineup, they really need to offer a DX equivalent. In portraiture, working distance matters, and using the 85/1.4 or 105/2 on a DX body just doesn't cut it. Again, give us USM (convenient manual focus is key on a portrait lens) and VR (for handheld portraiture).

 

- The already mentioned 50-135 or 50-150 or even 50-200/2.8 ED USM VR. Again, the short-to-mid tele range zoom has been a staple of the Nikon lens lineup. We need a direct equivalent in the new DX lens lineup.

 

I have to the 12-24, and it's "ok". I haven't really thought about excellent wide primes I'd like to see for the DX lineup, but I imagine with a little thought I could rant a bit here as well ;-)

 

Scott