borgis_karl_johan

<p>Hello again Björn,<br>

so you are less enthusiastic about the 200mm f2,0 VR lens now than you used to be when you wrote the original reports? You stated then "this is one of my most-used lenses" and "continues to deliver its magic on the D3".<br>

I had the opportunity recently to take a fair number of test images which I found impressive, particularly once the lens is stopped down to 2,8 and 4,0 but also wide open. It is rather weight and of course the price even for a used unit that make me hesitatant... I consider using it on DX with a monopod for travel and animals, possibly combined with the TC-17E mentioned by the OP. I do however already have the 1,4 and 2,0 variants.</p>

<p>Hello Björn,<br>

have you tried the TC 17E with the 200mm 2,0 VR lens? I have this combination on offer.<br>

Cordially<br>

Karl Johan</p>

<p>Sorry for the misspellings, that should read "in a quick shooting situation"- I pushed the confirm instead of the update button.</p>

<p>For me, the tragically weak point of the actually available zoom is flare- if the sun shines even very obliquely down the lens barrel -even with the lens shade mounted- contrast gets worse than with a Kodak Instamatic from the 60s... Rendering the lens practically useless unless you can block the sun which may be impractical i a quich shooting situation. Strange that Nikon allowed for this performance glitch considering that older versions hardly suffered from flare. Yes, I have owned those, the first push-pull zoom as well as the two-ring version. Both good.<br>

I doubt I will exchange my sample at least until initial demand goes well down- my present lens is excellent. Also it is the grey version which is kind of fun to own for subjective reasons. Over the years a fair share of lemons have passed through my hands (17-35mm, 35-105mm, several Sigmas) thus I know the risk of exchanging a good thing I already own. At least usually I do.... :-)</p>

<p>20mm f4 AI, 45mm f2,8P, 28-50mm f3,5 AI, 105mm f1,8 AIS<br>

all used pretty frequently on DX with a D200, it will be interesting to see what happens when -if ever- I switch to FX.</p>

<p>The F100 if using matrix mode in back-lit scenes would cause underexposed slides - at least with the body I owned - a problem I rarely or never encountered with the F4 I shot slide film with before.<br>

Otherwise the F100 remains an excellent camera. I have sadly left analog photography, though, as with increasingly low volumes it is getting too difficult to find a reliable lab to consistently develop slide film.</p>

<p>I always felt the quality of the graduated plastic Cokin filters used with slide film to be rather marginal- I wonder how quality holds with digital?</p>

<p>There is one for sale in Gothenburg/ Sweden on the "Blocket" auction site right now, supposedly in absolutely new condition. Price works out around 6700 USD though, might be lowered a little according to the text. No idea about custom fees. But if you MUST have one right now...</p>

<p>Well,<br>

I just recieved my replacement (Phottix Titan) battery after my supposedly still new Nikon EN-EL3e died on me, probably because I missed reloading it immediately. No way I could revive it! <br>

The generic battery has loaded and shows on the display so I hope there shall be no problems. I will report if anything happens and I am still around to tell... ;-).</p>

<p>If you normally use just one filter at a time, you can easily saw off the external slots holding filters and just preserve the innermost slot. Thats what I did when I used this holder with the 17-35 mm lens on my now retired F100. There was only vignetting if the holder by accident was turned at an angle. Otherwise this solves the problem.</p>

<p>So at last Nikon seems to have produced a modern legend in this range- oh yes I am extremely pleased with mine on a D200.</p>

<p>Read this thread too just in case you missed it:<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00T5rw">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00T5rw</a></p>

 

<p>The 85 mm lens is a superb portrait lens, as I suppose everyone here would be ready to acknowledge. In that role none of the lenses I mentioned above outshines it if used on a DX camera, in my case a D200.<br>

For use with 35mm slide film I think the nod may perhaps rather go to the 105 DC lens, this is highly, highly subjective though.<br>

My 5 cents</p>

<p>It is kind of interesting that folks actually sell their D700 to return to a D200 with the 16-85mm lens. Seems Nikon after many tries has created a dream team. Or is it just because the 24-120mm full-frame zoom is so mediocre?</p>

<p>Has anyone in this esteemed forum ever used Agfachrome 1000? Once in the dim analog past -maybe in the early 1980s- I used to carry this film for bad light conditions together with a regular ASA 50 or 100 film - the brand varied (Fuji- Ekta- Kodachrome).<br /> I am unsure whether this film was ever marketed in the US. Contrasted with the images of ASA 1000 slide film ANY digital image with the D200 is pure heavens :-)<br /> Now please do not take this comment TOO seriously...</p>

<p>I just wonder: what has caused Nikon to abandon 100 ASA as baseline sensitivity in the D700? Technical or marketing reasons or some other cause I cannot fathom at all? With 200 ASA it may be difficult to use large apertures on a bright day without resorting to neutral density filters and the like. And yes, I know that you can adjust sensitivity to -1 but why the hassle and not 100 ASA as a straightforward choice?</p>

<p>For DX and non-professional purposes the 16-85mm VR lens is maybe THE contender (sorry if this sounds melodramatic). After using it a lot - often as a standard travel lens combined with a 70-200mm zoom- I come away very impressed and will probably stay longer with DX than I planned a year ago.<br>

Of course there are better fixed focal length alternatives for when the lights go low and for portrait use- the 85mm f1,4 AF that I am lucky to have comes to mind...</p>

<p>Interesting options arise once Nikon is able to market an "affordable" 24Mp FX sensor which when used in DX mode still gives you around 10Mp.<br>

A combination say of the 17-35mm f2,8 (used as FX), 16-85mmVR (DX) and 70-200mm f2,8 (used as FX- and if need arises also DX?) would become a dream set. Losses with the mid-range DX lens would be rather marginal and all these lenses are great.</p>

 

<p>The F-mount makes owning Nikon cameras thrilling- you never know what old goody might be around the corner... Just over the last two years, I have found and use practically mint samples of the 20mm f4, 28-50mm f3,5 and -just this week- the 15mm f5,6 lenses, all splendid optics in this digital age, particularly the first two. Now I have set my sights on the early 300 mm 4,5 ED lens, another rare bird of repute.<br>

Keep digging...!<br>

Karl Johan</p>

<p>I can second any postings praising the general optical quality of the 16-85mm lens- it has been my preferred walkaround lens since July when I got my sample.<br>

This lens is so good and practical that -strange though it might seem- it could even delay me getting into the FX format (with the D700 or its inevitable higher MP successor) for the time being. I by the way still own the older full-format 24-120mm lens whose performance to me was only marginally acceptable. To judge by most postings the new VR lens covering the FX format is still comparatively inferior to the 16-85 mm DX lens. <br>

Cordially<br>

Karl Johan</p>

<p>Sorry, I seem to be unable to reduce my images enough for photo.net to accept it. Lowest quality with Adobe is around 240 kB.</p>

<p>Pelicans on Manzanillo beach, Santa Margarita, Venezuela.</p>

<p>I have owned the 16-85 mm VR lens for some months now and taken maybe 5-600 images or more on a D200. Image quality is really, really good and VR works like a charm.<br>

I honestly believe Nikon can hardly ever have produced a more versatile zoom lens with such great quality.I have owned a number of Nikons wide- to- tele zooms and never stayed with one of them.<br>

Mechanically it is good too. DX only, of course.<br>

Cordially<br>

Karl Johan</p>

A return to the old compact lenses Nikon did so well: the likes of the 20mm f4 recently discussed in other

forum posts, the 45mm f2,8 pancake lens, a 70(80)- 200mm f4 (f4,5?) compact VR lens.

 

Not exclusively big brutes of 14-24mm caliber (handled one today- high quality but ridiculously huge!). Who

manages to shoot unobtrusively in a crowd with that one?? Seems Nikon plans to discontinue the 17-35mm

f2,8- too small perhaps? :-)

 

By the way, I managed to squeeze away a few shots with the new 50mm f1,4 lens on their loaner D700.

Enlarged shots viewed on the camera monitor seemed to show high sharpness in the center (only region I

could reliably evaluate) at f1,4.

 

Just my 5 cents

 

Karl

A wonderful DX combo is the 20mm f4 wideangle with a 45mm pancake and (yes, this is when I abandon

compactness) the 85mm f1,4 AF lens. All great lenses.

 

A walk about town with this combo is pure happiness... :-).

 

Karl