albert_smith

Years ago, I had the 35mm f/2.0 AF for my introduction to AF. That lens failed when the aperture blades became gummed up, so I went back to my manual focus version, the f/1.4 AIS.

I now have a D40, and while I have every manual focus AI / AIS Nikkor from 20mm to 300mm, I need an auto-focus lens for metering with my camera. I dug out the 35mm f/2.0, mounted it and shot a whole series at f/2.0 (the only f-stop that would work). The results were so good that I went out and bought a brand new one. This lens has been on my camera for thousands of photos now, and it makes for a nice compact body / lens combo that delivers great images.

This lens offers good sharpness and contrast, even wide open. It allows selective focus or deep focus when needed. The lens focuses quickly, and for me of the D40, manual focus via the electonic rangefinder is fast and sure. This is one more vote, based on experience for the 35mm f/2.0 AF as a nice prime lens for a digital Nikon.<div></div>

<I>...and too short for portraits?</I><P>

Not every portrait is a head shot. The 50mm on a digital capture is more than long enough for a mid chest-to-head shot. You get low-light ability, moderate selective focus, and very good sharpness for a very low price.<P>

I just shot this window light shot yesterday with my D40 and 50mm f/1.8 AIS at f/2.8 (had to meter with a hand-held meter). The 100% image on my monitor is so sharp that it is cruel, with every pore and blemish is rendered in biting detail.<P>

The 50mm f/1.8 has to be one of the best deals from Nikon in terms of price to performance.<div></div>

<I>...back to Nikon SLRs (FM2N), and got the 85 f2 Nikkor... It's not as heralded as the 105 but I like it. </I><P>

Yes, I use the 85mm f/2.0 also and find it to be very fine. My choice for the use of the 85mm versus the 105mm was based on the second lens in my two-lens kit (24mm with the 85mm and 35mm with the 105mm).<P>

Now with a digital SLR, I am finding the 85mm on the camera most often for my choice of a medium telephoto due to the crop factor. As much as I love the 105mm with film, the angle of view with digital is too narrow for most of my subjects.<P>

<I>If I remember, Albert has some other cycle-day photos taken with it (85mm f/2.0 Nikkor). They're equal to the 105 in every way, if you ask me.</I><P>

If you click on my name and look at the photos I have posted, many are shot with the 85mm f/2.0, most pretty close to wide-open. Check the details for the actual lens used.

I have and use the FM2n, and I would prefer that model for two reasons.

First, the FM2 and FM2n both have a top shutter speed of 1/4000th, compared to the top speed of 1/1000th of the first FM model. Even if you never shoot sports or have the need to stop action, 1/4000th lets you have more control over depth of field. This high shutter speed will let you use a wider f-stop even in good light, so that you can shoot at f/2.0 instead of f/5.6 for example. An outdoor portrait at f/2.0 can be more effective by blurring the background more than the same shot at f/5.6, making that 1/4000th a good thing to have at you disposal.

Next the thing that separates the FM2 and FM2n is the flash sync, with the FM2n going up to 1/250th compared to 1/200th on the FM2. This will allow for fill flash in brighter light on the FM2n.

Between the FM2 and FM2n, the choice may be academic since the run of the FM2 was shorter, and the bulk of the availible models would be from the FM2n range.

To use any lens on an FM model of any type, it must have an aperture ring, so the lens you wish to use will only work if it has that ring. Be aware also that a variable aperture lens is less than fun to use on a mechanical manual model since every zoom action will require an adjustment of the f-stop.

Yes, in the long term, read all of the books and learn the specifics of exposure.

In the short term, today, set your camera to ISO 800, aperture priority mode, set the f-stop to f/1.4, focus on the most important part of the scene, press the shutter release.

ISO 800 will give a good balence of light sensitivity and image quality. Aperture priority mode will automatically set the shutter speed based on the f-stop used and the lighting. The f/1.4 aperture will allow the most light into the camera in the shortest time (with hopefully a handholdable speed). Focus will be very narrow at f/1.4, so this is why you need to make sure to focus on the most important part of the scene, as the rest will be out of focus.

Press the shutter, review the results, repeat, repeat, repeat...<div></div>

<I>Prints from Wal Mart (Yes... WAL MART) look better to me and are cheaper than home-made inkjet prints. Costco is great, too. imho, stick with the Fuji machines.</I><P>

I agree. If you give a good digital file, the results are very good from the Fuji machine at my Walmart. When my printer ran out of ink, I looked at the quality of the several hundred 8 X 10s that I made at Walmart, did the math, and and never bought replacement carts for the printer.

I will jump in with those that suggest canon A-series cameras, but you say that, <I>"I do like having the LCD that tilts up..."</I>, so let me suggest that if you can swing 50 more bucks, several office suppy stores here are offering a bundled A-630 with a Canon photo printer for 200 Dollars.<P>

The 8 meg A-630 has been giving me great results for quite a while now (purchased when it was 349 Dollars for the camera alone!). The 2.5 inch LCD swivels and tilts for shot compositions that would be pretty hard with a standard finder. The image quality right from the SD card printed at any lab that does digital printing has made many of my DSLR using friends think I am lying when I show them the camera that I used.<div></div>

I'll second Gary's recommendation. I have been using the L-308 for over a decade with old non-metering Leicas and Nikons, and now I use it with my D-40 which does not meter with my two-dozen AI / AIS Nikkors. With digital, it gives me perfect exposures.

The meter is the size of a deck of cards, uses a single "AA" battery (which lasts forever), and offers incident, reflective and flash metering with no external accessories. The readings gives the exposure in 1/10th of a stop (see the tick marks showing f/2 and 6/10ths @ 1/60th), and you can sweep through every combination to use the f-stop or shutter speed that is important to you.

Just the size alone will make this painless to have with you, but the performance will make you happy that you do.<div></div>

Maybe of some interest...<P>

M8 user goes to Japan and tries P&S, with unexpected results...<P>

<a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/G9-Japan.shtml">

here</a>

I agree with Carl. Use the kit lens until the lack of ability to get shots that you want makes it clear what your next lens should be.

I have gone on vacation back in the film days with only a 35mm lens and came back with good photos, while I have also gone out "loaded for bear" with a big bag of lenses and came back with nothing exciting. Stay simple.

I bought the D40 and went out for a few days with the 18-55 just to see how good it was. The results were a surprise, and if I had no other Nikon glass, I think it could be used for some time. As it is though, I do have a closet full of Nikkors, so now I have a 35mm f/2.0 AF lens on my D40, and it has been on the camera being manually focused for near a 1000 shots now.

Use what you have for a while.

Just for another data point... My A630 has been used a lot since I bought it in April 2007, literally thousands of shots, and I am on my third set of "AA" batteries. My other Canon, the A620, has a similar battery consumption rate.

FWIW... I almost never use flash, so that is one less thing that the batteries have to power up. I also mostly never do serious reviewing / editing via the LCD. I shoot, then when I get home, I hook the camera up to the T.V. (via the included cable), and then review and delete, which makes the LCD stay off. And last, I just use regular "AA" batteries, not rechargeables.

<I>I will look for a better sample pronto.</I><P>

Well, since you are going to look for a new lens, why not go for something a bit more evolved?

The 35-70 f/3.3-4.5 was replaced by the 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 AF about the time that the N90 came out. The lens fairly petite. One selling point was that you could shoot with cameras (from that era) that had pop-up flashes even at 28mm without cut-off from the lens barrel due to its size.<P>

The lens is pretty good optically, and it was used back in the early '90s the show a side-by-side comparison of how a zoom could equal (or nearly equal) a fixed prime 50mm lens. Popular Photography magazine did a shoot againt a highly rated Contax 50mm f/1.7 with the Nikkor at 50mm, both at f/4 (f/4.1 for the zoom),and the test showed that the zoom was just as good as the 50mm prime.<P>

I got mine in 1994, used it on my N8008 and even my F3 with good success for times I wanted to travel light. Today, I use it still on my digital SLR for a nice people friendly (35mm equiv) 42-105mm zoom.<div></div>

<center>

<img src="http://www.photo.net/bboard-uploads/00O0Ty-40968984.JPG">

</center>

<I>...wondering if this is a good substitute for the 35mm f2 D.................Pro's ...Con's?</I><P>

I guess I'll make a case for the 35mm f/2.0. The 35mm focal length was my standard for decades on the many film cameras that I used. Now that I have a digital SLR that does not meter with my manual focus AI / AIS Nikkors, I dug out my old 35mm f/2.0 AF Nikkor that sat unused for the better part of a decade (since I got the very fine f/1.4 Nikkor), and put it on the DSLR. This lens is now giving me the angle of view of a longer lens, but it has still been living on my camera since I put it on.<P>

What I like:

The speed (aperture) is usually enough for me to not have to use flash.<P>

The combination of the slightly longer (than the 28mm that you ask about), and slightly faster (than that same lens) makes for the ability to use both deep focus techiques <I>and</I> selective focus. This make the lens more versitile for me,and I am usually shooting at f/2.0 just to get this effect.<P>

The 35mm f/2.0 AF lens focuses very close, and while not a true macro lens, it can get shots with detail of small items, and at the same time give context. I'll post a minimal distance shot to show this.<P>

The lens is light and small, and on my small DSLR, I have a nice minimalist kit that can give results much better than any P&S, while not having the profile of a huge f/2.8 zoom... which is still slower.<div></div>

A few tips....

Get a good book (or books) on photography. The camera manual is not that book.

Don't try to shoot portraits, sports, landscapes, street, etc... all within 10 frames. Decide what your interest is and then dive head on into that specific area. Stay immersed in that type of photography until you start to be able to get consistent results.

Decide what is important... action stopping or depth of field, and then use the mode that best helps you get what you want... hint, it is most likely not the green mode.

Unlike film, you can shoot and learn very quickly (and cheaply) to practice a specific lesson, so shoot and learn by doing towards a narrow task. For example learn how aperture effects DOF by going out and shooting the same scene at multiple f-stops (again, not in the green mode) and see the effect. The good thing with digital is that you can see exactly what the settings were after the shoot (in the film days we had to keep notes as to what f-stop / shutter speed we used).

Don't be satisfied with a "happy accident", but know how to replicate the photo in other situations. Instead of saying, "This photo looks good for some reason", you should say, "This photo looks good because I used a wide aperture to isolate the subject against the busy background, and to utilize the flattering light of the window (instead of the flash)..."

The D40 (I have one too) seems limited to certain AF lenses, but a lot of photography happened before auto focus was ever invented. I use many older (non-S) lenses with manual focus by utilizing that electronic rangefinder dot to assure focus. I can use very fast lenses that allow for lighting that the zoom that you got with you camera can't. Natural light with wide apertures can do what that on-camera flash can't. Minimally, invest in a 50mm f/1.8 AF lens,learn to focus manually, and you will be able to do things that can make for some great photos.

Shoot

Shoot

Shoot some more....<div></div>

I have used the AIS version for 15 years and it is a very good performer on film... edge-to-edge. I don't know how this great lens could be "not so good" just because it is used on a DX camera. The optical strengths should not change just because the edges fall outside of the capture area.

I have used the 20mmf/2.8 AIS lens on my D40, and it is as good as it is on my film Nikons, albeit cropped to 30mm, but just as sharp and contrasty as it is normally. Due to the lack of metering with the D40, I use my Sekonic handheld meter, set the f-stop manually and shoot.

<I>The pics I've taken to compare with the 50mm actually look more similar than I would have thought...</I><P>

There is a difference between the size of the eyes-to-ears ratio, with more pronounced eyes in the 50mm shot. This is a function of the lens making you get closer to get the same size head. The perspective is from the distance, and the lens simply frames the shot.<P>

The 85mm shot is more flattering not least of all because the longer distance makes the shot more eye-level, compared to the downward angle of the 50mm.

Sometimes the things that make a lens look good (or bad) "on-paper" may not be of any value within its intended use. I think that if I want to shoot flat text, I would choose a slow lens with good edge-to-edge sharpness.

The value of a lens with a speed in the f/1-point-something range is for those times when, based on the light, that speed can make or break a shot, or for when you can exploit the speed for depth of field considerations.

Maybe a more valid test would be a 3D subject in an environment with foreground, middle ground and back ground and see how the lens renders the subject within that environment. As I found with my 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor, a slightly curved field makes for a nice selective focus effect for a person in a room, but it would be the last lens I grab to shoot a test chart.<div></div>

<I>Vivitar Series 1, 28-90 f/2.8-3.5....and, the Kiron 28-105 f/3.2-4.5,...</I><P>

A variable aperture zoom is less than fun with a fully manual match-diode camera. A zoom can be faster than primes as far as framing, but if you need to tweak the aperture after each zoom action, that speed is not as good as it seems.<P>

If a zoom is desired, look for constant aperture ones (28-50mm f/3.5 AIS Nikkor, or the very fine 75-150mm f/3.5 Series E for example), so that after you set the f-stop and shutter speed, you can zoom freely and know that f/5.6 is always f/5.6.