rixhobbbies Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Greetings, all! I'm curious what the zoom lenses are like in the Nikon line. What are your favorite wide, medium and telephoto zooms in terms of optical and build quality? I'm considering a switch to Nikon but have more familiarity with the Canon line. For instance, I love the build quality of the "L" lenses in the Canon line but two lenses that I've found that are really sharp with pleasing colors are part of their consumer line (17-55 and 70-300 IS lenses). The build quality is actually pretty good as well. So, a lens doesn't have to crazy expensive to have good optics and build quality. What favorites do you folks have in the Nikon line? Regards, Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natharit_srimanus Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 AF-D 80-200 is the best price/performance combination, IMO. It's not as big and expensive as the af-s counterpart. It also has less glass, which make it a little more stable than the af-s and IS versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixhobbbies Posted January 28, 2007 Author Share Posted January 28, 2007 That lens sounds like a counterpart to the Canon 70-200 L (non IS), which is a very highly regarded lens. Most of the time I am unable to take tripod along when I shoot, so I've found IS / VR to be quite valuable, especially in low light. For instance, shooting desert critters hiding in the share under a rock or bush makes hand-holding a little difficult. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_margolis Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Everyone will answer your questions differently. Here's my take... For wide, I like the 12-24mm. For 'medium' zoom, I am one who likes the 18-200 VR. Many don't like this lens (see other threads). This seems to be a love it or hate it lens. I'm one who really likes it. Overall, a great walkaround lens for me. Good alternative, the 80-200, which may be a better quality lens. For tele, there is the 80-400 VR. I am not as thrilled with it optically but the zoom range is great and VR feature is wonderful if you don't have a tripod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natharit_srimanus Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I've never tried the Canon 70-200 2.8L (non-IS). But I've used the 70-200 4L for quite a bit. And trust me, the optic of the Nikon is way better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marike1 Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I use the 17-55 and 70-200 2.8 lenses. With these two lenses, I can cover a lot of situations. I also have an 18-70 that I sometimes use on a second body that is no slouch. I plan to add the 12-24 soon to round out the wide end, although I'm starting to worry a bit about investing too much in DX lenses in the event that Nikon offers a full-frame DSLR in the near future. Not that I'll be able to afford it, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Well, I guess my dream zoom combo for Nikon digital would be the 12-24/4, 17-55/2.8, 70-200/2.8 VR, and the 200-400/4 VR. Except for the latter, Canon has equivalents, I believe. I think in terms of AF speed that the 100-400 Canon is better than the 80-400 Nikon. I shoot with the 12-24, the 18-70, and the 80-200 AF-D and am fairly happy; I also have the 70-180 Micro Nikkor Zoom which isn't manufactured any longer. For film, I use a 18-35/3.5-4.5 because the 17-35 was just too expensive. The 24-85/3.5-4.5 is my everyday lens on the film camera body. Just out of curiosity, why would you switch from Canon to Nikon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixhobbbies Posted January 28, 2007 Author Share Posted January 28, 2007 The reasons I am considering the switch from Canon to Nikon two fold: Ergonomic preferences and the 18-200 VR lens. I may or may not do this. So far, my XTi's 17-55 and 70-300 are noticably sharper at pretty much any focal length, but the D200 tends to make better judgements in exposure under differing lighting situations. I'm not sure yet what I plan to do, though. I have both systems in hand and I am taking pictures with both. I am trying to avoid side by side comparisons and going mostly by how I feel about the images I am getting and how easy the camera was to operate. Regards, Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roman_p Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Probably one of the most glorious Nikon zoom is 80-200 f2.8 ED AF-D with tripod collar (I believe that Nikon "ED" is equivalent to Canon "L"). Just a classic example. But if weight and size is your primarily concern try 35-200 f3.5-4. A relatively compact, sharp with excellent building quality lens. Available in AIS mount only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Rick, it is great that you can try both systems; I only handled Canons a few times in the store and as a long time Nikon user had my problems adjusting. Many things come out under real shooting conditions anyway. I have the D200 and love it; I might buy a second body if I get the 80-400 VR. I had the 18-200 on order for 9 months altogether, and then decided to cancel the order and make do with what I have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daviddbfotoart Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Really cannot do without my 80-200 2.8 ed. The images are sharp and beautifully rendered. I have shot an entire wedding with it alone! (overcast day, with only the couple, no guests) I also use my 17-55 2.8 as it is an amazing lens. I have seen some amazing things done with the 28-70 2.8, but find its wide end not wide enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_rubenstein___nyc Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I shoot weddings and the Nikon 17-55/2.8 is my primary lens. It's one of Nikon's pro line lenses, and is equal to a Canon "L" lens. It is not, however, an IS/VR lens like the Canon. I know that there are a number of other wedding shoooters that are very happy with the Tamron 17-50/2.8, which is much cheaper than the Nikon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixhobbbies Posted January 28, 2007 Author Share Posted January 28, 2007 Do you find you miss having VR on the 17-55? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelging Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 80-200 2.8 AF, a beautiful lens ,sharp, contrasty and nice Bokeh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_rubenstein___nyc Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I don't have any VR lenses, but there are times I wish I did. Being able to shoot at ISO 400 instead of 1600, or 1/15 sec. instead of 1/60 would be nice. It's less bother for these marginal shots than a tripod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_hooper1 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 I have great passion for my 80-200mm 1:2.8 AF D. I'm not sure if it is quite as remarkable as the non-AF version which I confidently relinquished thinking the AF version would be the Holy Grail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik_loza Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 1.) 17-35mm 2.) 80-200mm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaglow Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 I wouldn't disagree with any of the prior posts, but I would add the 18-35mm for bang for the buck. I've found it to be a wonderful lens, but it gets panned in some reviews. Maybe I just got lucky with my sample<g>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franco_mascagni Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 I love the 80-200 2.8. It is very sharp, contrasty and with a wonderful color reproduction. I had several of them but I like most the one with tripod collar. I find that this is also very well balanced and handling is wonderful. I am in love with this lens. The only disappointing thing is the hood, but I managed to cut and put together the HB7 with the hood for the 80-200 2.8 S and the combination works like a charm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmw Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Since I went digital, I have the standard trio of zooms - 12-24 f4, 17-55 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8. I'm a long time wide angle shooter and I really miss my fixed focal length wide angles from the 35mm film days. Perhaps Nikon will cater to my preferences some time in the future. The 70-200 is exceptional. The 17-55 is OK, nothing spectacular about it but fine for a zoom. The 12-24 has some strange perspective distortion that may be typical of WA zooms. Honestly, I don't know. I do know that it doesn't perform as well as my fixed wide angles did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeroen dommisse Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 28-50/3.5 AI on my '65 Nikon F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabophoto Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 17-55/2.8 and 12-24/4 Carsten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd_phillips1 Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 I'm strictly a film shooter and three zoom Nikkors handle 90% of my 35mm assignment shooting. The 20-35 2.8 is my standard lens. Very sharp and MUCH smaller than the 28-70 2.8. My 35-70 2.8 is used for a lot of location strobe work and it cuts like a knife. I have 16X20's made from 35mm chromes that are outstanding. And when I need a tele lens, then the 80-200 2.8 AFS fits the bill. Again, outstanding sharpness and the focus speed is great. You can't go wrong with any or all of these lense. Some are very affordable right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 From the ones I had/have the AF-D NIKKOR 18-35mm ED have to be my favorite so far. I'm getting a AF-S 24-85mm ED as a mid-range.. hope to add it to the favorite list. On prime lenses 105mm 2.5 and the ultra SHARP 55mm Micro 2.8 are by far my top pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william_kazak1 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 I like the 35mm F2AF for wide. 50mm F1.4AF for medium. 105mm F2DAF-DC for tele. 180mm F2.8AF long tele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now