Need to replace my Nikon 35mm f2. Considering a zoom lens

[seth_prince1]

I'm not really into zooms. i always figured the ones that i could afford wouldn't be nearly as sharp as a prime lens. On my D200 (my F100

is gathering a heavy coating of dust, hahahaha) i usually switch between the 24mm and the 35mm.

i'm looking at the Tamron 17-50 f-2.8, the sigma 18-50 f-2.8 and the Tokina 16-50 f-2.8

i'll have to go to the shop and determine if i even need to go any wider than 24mm (on a D200 DX format), but it might be nice

i do mostly urban landscape, street photography, and studio photography

will any of these lenses compare with the Nikon 35 f-2?

[photo5]

We used the Nikon 35mm f2 manual focus lens for all of our candids at weddings for years, it's a real workhorse of a lens with superb quality and construction. I was lucky to find an AI version in mint condition recently on the auction site for $150, which is a much better deal than recent sales of the f1.4 version for $550+ !!

 

We replaced that lens with the Tamron 28-105mm f2.8 zoom, a huge ungainly beast with outstanding optical quality. I'd be tempted to check out their 17-50mm f2.8 zoom. Tamron is amazing, I had their el-cheapo 28-80mm zoom back in 2000 for a few months. I think I paid $50 for it new! It made great prints and slides, but I decided to upgrade to the Nikon 28-105mm AF-D Macro zoom before I went to Japan in November, 2000. I'm a big fan of Tamron. Tokina too, their 17mm f3.5 manual focus lens was my favorite for years in the 1990s. Sigma not as much, their lenses don't seem to perform optically quite as well but they have their highs and lows too.

[preston_harper]

I have the Tamron 17-50 and it is a great lens.

[frank_field]

I'd recommend you check out the reports at http://www.photozone.de. I've done critical tests on most of the lenses I own and find my results to be very consistent with the reports at photozone.

[leicaglow]

Seth, one of the under rated lenses in Nikon's line up is the 18-35mm. It's not very fast, but I swear it's close to the 17-35mm in performance, just not as fast. It is full frame and I use it all the time on my D200s as my normal lens. It is the only zoom I have. I'm not sure, but I recently heard they're discontinuing it (everyone likes the super zooms it seems, even though the image quality is often dreadful on those lenses<g>).

[JDMvW]

Ditto for Photozone reviews. They are very useful.

 

At best, and for a fair amount of change, a zoom is going to be slower. I like zooms and primes for different reasons and uses, so my suggestion is keep the 35mm f/2 and get the zoom for greater flexibility in better light. My guess, without actually going to the reviews, is that it's going to be hard to beat the prime optically, but that being said, sometimes you just don't need all that "quality." A lot of great pictures in the old days were taken with lenses that weren't even as good as mediocre modern lenses.

[yuri_sopko]

You can try one my favorite lenses: The Nikon 18-55 VR. About $200, has VR, small, compact, and light.

 

Unless, you are looking for the faster f/2.8. Which I would ditto with the others on the Tamron.

 

Also, when you say how do they compare to the 35/2, how do you mean? Sharpness? Contrast? Bokeh? This is somewhat important as any zoom lens will have horrible bokeh compared to the 35/2. I know this as I have a 35/2 and the 18-55VR. You'll have to let us know what particulars you have about image quality.

 

Yuri

[markko]

I have a D200 and have owned the Tamron 17-50mm, and still own the 18-70mm and the 35mm F2. The 35mm F2 is the sharpest in my eyes in terms of corners but this is only at 100%. The 18-70mm has the best overall image quality in terms of punchy colours, etc and it's versatile. I'll be honest, contrary to what some have written here, I really did not like the Tamron. Sure, F2.8 was nice, but I found it always added a weird orange colour cast to my photos and it frequently caused the camera to overexpose. May have been my example only, but I find the 18-70mm a much better lens and I don't mind turning up the ISO a little to compensate. I haven't had much luck with third-party lenses.