Physically small lenses for Nikon D300

[brad_richardson1]

<p>I recently purchased the "less expensive" 50mm 1:1.8D lens to use on my D300 (even though its FX not DX) and I am so pleased that its physically smaller than other zooms and primes I own and the quality is fine. Can you tell me of any other not so bulky lenses for D300? Thanks.</p>

[johnfarrar]

<p>The 35mm f2 AFD is about the same size; rather poor wide open, but sharp at f8. As its edges are its weakest feature, it could be fine on a DX body. Many of the old AI and AIS lenses, with 52 mm filter threads, are much smaller than their current replacements.</p>

[mag_miksch]

<p>Sigma Super Wide II, 24/2.8</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>the nikon 35/1.8 DX is pretty tiny. i would get that over the 35/2 AF-D. not much point in an f/2 lens which doesnt get sharp until f/8. the tokina 17/3.5 is almost, but not quite, a pancake; definitely the shortest ultrawide i own.</p>

[Richard Williams]

<p>The 18-55 VR II is tiny when retracted:<br>

http://www.muada.com/2014/lt1.jpg<br>

(though an inch or so longer when extended for shooting)</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>On the D300 I used to use a 24/2.8AFD. It is small and with a good focal lenght for the format.</p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>My favorite tiny lens is Nikkor 45mm f2.8P with contacts but manual focus only. Unique operates with all programs and has unique neutral protection filter, lens hood and cap that fits over the hood. Produced from 2001 to 2005 for FM2a manual film camera. I use it on a Nikon mount Fuji S-1 pro crop sensor with great results.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>85mm f2 and 105mm f2.5 are both small for what they offer, but manual focus.</p>

[SCL]

<p>The manual focus Nikon Series E 50/1.8 will make your 50 look large by comparison. Been using one on my D300 for years.</p>

[jim_interlicchio1]

<p>1+ for the 24mm 2.8 AF Nikkor. Haven't shot with the D300s lately -this pic is from a few years back - did like the small form factor of this lens with a grip -less D300s </p><div></div>

[Rick Helmke]

<p>+1 on the MF 85/2, a very nice and very compact lens, it stays in my smaller go everywhere digital bag. Excellent quality. I also like the MF 28/3.5, another go everywhere lens for me. The E series lenses are notoriously sharp, small and light. Yeah all of this is manual focus but are small and very good. </p>

<p>Rick H.</p>

[rjm photo]

I actually own the 35mm AFD F2 lens

and I have gotten excellent results with

it. It was nikons go to 35 mm lens for a

long time. I have found it completely

satisfactory throughout it range. To say

it is poor until F8 is incorrect. The 17

mm Tokina is a favorite of mine but it is

large comparatively speaking and heavy,

especially with the mandatory hood. I

would consider the 20mm AFD also if

you are looking for a smaller versatile

lenses. People like to call that a poor

lens also but why would Nikon still be

producing them today? It is a

reasonably smaller lens with hood and

very good on Dx. I have had excellent

results on my D200 with the above as

well as with FX D700 and film Nikon F5

and F4. These older lens can give

excellent results and they are small

and work on both DX and FX formats

should you decide one day to try a

wider format. I second the

recommendation of the 85 F2 AI and

105 AI as small and capable of

excellent results from currently owning

and using those. Best of all for the above lenses they are now inexpensive.

[dan_brown4]

<p>I am a very big fan of compact gear, especially lenses.</p>

<p>Of course, you have the range of D-AF primes, including the 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.0, the 50's, and the 85/1.8.</p>

<p>A couple of lenses I carry regularly are the 28-70/3.5-4.5D-AF zoom, and the 80-200/4.5-5.6D zooms. Here's a couple pictures of my daily kit:</p>

<p><img src="http://www.dlaab.com/photo/Df/daily_kit1.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://www.dlaab.com/photo/Df/daily_kit2.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[CvhKaar]

<p>Another "Small Beauty"is the e-series 100mm F2.8, it is barely larger than a 50mm, ( so looks like a 100mm in a 50mm package), and it is tack sharp ( mine is..).</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>I've got the AF-D 35 f/2 and have had the AF-S 35 /f1.8DX - the older f/2 lens on DX is a poor choice in comparison: it's more expensive and it's not better than the DX lens (my f/2 is really good from f/4 on, but shines at longer distances at smaller apertures; the 35 f/1.8 DX performs already nice wide open, even if the OoF rendering isn't great, but the f/2D again isn't better at that either).<br>

Also used an Ai 24 f/2.8 quite a lot - decent lens on the D300, but nothing particularly good. Finding good, small wide angle lenses for DX is still the difficult gap. I much liked the 105 f/2.5 on my D300 (and even more on full frame); it's not as compact as the 50mm, but it's not large by any stretch of imagination.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Voigtlander offers three small lenses - a 20/3.5, a 28/2.8 and a 40/2 - all manual focus of course.</p>

[vivid_earth_photographics]

THe tokina 11-17 was a favorite and surprisingly compact choice when I had a d300.

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>The 20mm f/3.5 AI Nikkor is a brilliant lens for its size. You might also want to check out a 75-150mm f/3.5 Series E zoom. AF adds bulk and usually comes with a build-quality downgrade.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Also, I don't think it was mentioned. The 35 f1.8 DX is not quite as small as some of these mentioned, but is a must have with a DX Nikon imho.</p>

[Ian Rance]

<p>There is the excellent 20mm f/4 Nikon lens too. I use this on my D7000 and it makes the camera quite compact. It has good colour and contrast as well as looking cute. It equates to a 30mm lens which is a very useful focal length.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

The older (1987?) small flat all metal Nikkor 50mm 1.8 is a great lens, manual focus. I have used mine since new, it's so

beat up but works perfect.

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<p>I don't think the 20mm f2.8 AF Nikkor was mentioned. It would be 30mm equiv on your camera and is almost a pancake lens. If you want discreet - this is it. Nobody will take this seriously on the street. Good luck with your photography.</p>

[brad_richardson1]

<p>Thank you everybody - what a wonderful community!</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>The 17 mm Tokina is a favorite of mine but it is large comparatively speaking and heavy, especially with the mandatory hood.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>it's all relative. the 17mm is, well, a 17mm lens. but its small for an UWA and smaller than a kit lens on a d300. i feel the build compliments the d300's as well, although i mainly use it on a D3s. forgot about the Voigtlander 40/2. that focal length IMO is better on FX but it is tiny.</p>

[arthur_smith1]

<p>Unfortunately, we live in "zoom nation" these days, and the latest myths are that zooms can outperform primes. It will never happen. They are convenient. But even the less expensive prime lenses can be spectacular. of course, with the D300 you have the goofy crop factor. But a 35 for normal, and a 50 for short portraits, is a nice combo. <br>

Kind of hard to look at slow zooms again, when you can open up to 1.2, 1.4, or 1.8 on normal primes. 2.8 might be as fast as a zoom can get. </p>