Nikon 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 DX on dpreview.

[breogan_gomez]

I am planing to buy this lens so I am lurking all the info I can find on

internet. Adding to all the well-known places such and Thom Hogan, Bjorn

Roselett and photozone I've found that www.dpreview.com had made also it's own

mini-review of this lens when they reviewed the D70 (see pages 18-19)

 

I just wanted to share it:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD70/page18.asp

 

Enjoy!

 

Breo

[studor13]

What's interesting for me is that at f13 - which is where I shoot a lot - sharpness is almost as good as f8. At f13 the DOF is huge at 18mm, and even with focus set to infinity everything is adequately sharp down to 1 metre.

 

At 70mm the test charts aren't great but in the real world it is still very good.

 

Thanks for the link BG.

[Rich B NYC]

I chose the 18-70 over the 18-135 kit lens when I bought my D80 and am not the least bit disappointed.

 

The build quality is decent enough and focusing is very quick. There is a bit of distortion at both ends so I try to choose my subjects accordingly. Stopped down a bit it's more than sharp enough for most peoples needs.

[breogan_gomez]

This lens seems to polarize opinions when compared to the 18-55. Some think this is a hidden gem while others think the same about the 18-70. The more realistic comment I've found so far I think is the Thom Hogan's one. When he states the 18-55 is good for its price but not stellar, and the 18-70 is better than the 18-55.

 

I've ordered mine, I hope in a few days I may be able to find out by myself.

[studor13]

AFAIK, the 18-55 is not an IF(internal focus) lens. This factor alone would stop me from buying it.

 

I like to use a circular polarizer, and on occasions a grad ND. The 18-55 would drive me nuts.

[breogan_gomez]

No, is not. The front part rotates when focus.

 

There is also no focusing distance scale, which is also a difference between the 18-70 and the 18-135.

[eric_arnold]

the 18-70 is better than the 18-55 and has as many ED elements (3) as the 17-55. however, i haven't used it much since i got the tamron 17-50 and 28-75, which are sharper and faster for not much more $$. it's definitely not that sharp wide open. if you never shoot in low-light conditions with no flash, the 18-70 is a nice lens, but if you do, you need a 2.8 or wider.

[dan_brown4]

My old D100 came with the 24-85. It wasn't wide enough. As some as the D70 kits first hit

the stores, my dealer was nice enough to sell me an 18-70 out of the kit, before Nikon sold

them separately. I still have that zoom and use it with my D200 frequenlty. Second only to

the 35/2.

 

The 18-70 is a great balance of price, performance, and features,

[ajay_ukidve1]

Hi,

This is with reference to Richards observation that 18-70 is better than the 18-135. I disagree a bit here. I have both the 18-70 and the 18-135 which I purchased later for my D70s. For amazing sharpness nothin can beat the 18-135. Albeit build quality of the 18-70 appears better, but rest assured that the plastic used in the 18-135 is fibre reinforced plastic quite a mean daddy also does not wear out that fast in the cam groves as feared. A whack which can destroy the plastic is good enough to damage the internals of the 18-70 too. Having said that I go on to say that the 18-135 is a much maligned lens. It is amazingly sharp nearly equal to the primes. Drawbacks are more or less similar to the 18-70. Except that light fall off is a bit more. Nothing which cannot be fixed in PP. In addition it has extended reach to 135 and also has iF. Price wise too it is cheaper at $250. It also comes with a 3 year warranty. I suggest try this beautiful lens.