von_tsotren

<p>I watched them as they trashed the 35/2 AF as well as the 85/1.4. For me the 35/2 is the best lens I've ever bought (price range to quality). I got it 120 Euros from ebay and the photos have always shined both on my F3 and my D700. Plus it is tiny and weightless compared to the 35/1.4.<br>

As for the 85/1.4 D TWO out of FIVE stars for OPTICAL QUALITY??? Have they shot it??? I quote "It's not without flaws, though. Typical for this lens class, it shows a significant amount of LoCAs. A little disappointing is its lack of sharpness towards the image borders and corners. So, technically, in summary the lens is not all that great."<br>

Translation: This dedicated work of art of a portrait lens is not sharp riiiiight at the end corners of my frame (where of course i hide my subjects) thus it sucks???<br>

Please...<br>

I've been shooting it for about two years both for portraits and landscape and trust "not that great" hasn't even crossed my mind.<br>

So to sum up: Who cares what photozone says? :)</p>

<p>Of course the nikon lens suggested before is the perfect choice, but if you're looking for a budget option check out the sigma 15-30 if you can still find it on ebay or somewhere. I got mine for 190 Euros and it's been a really good addition to the D700.</p>

<p>examples (d700 + sigma 15-30):<br>

http://highdef.mrtso.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/DSC_8337.jpg<br>

http://highdef.mrtso.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/DSC_8031.jpg</p>

<p>Sorry, but I don't see any "graininess". :) Any clearer than that and the image would be plastic.</p>

<p>This to <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=280329">Justin Heimsch</a> (sorry I have no idea how to reply to individual replies...) Thanks for the feedback, I am aware of the AF tuning function, but unfortunately it wasn't a focus problem. The focus is flawless. The blur perists in spite of it. Thanks!</p>

<p>Thank you for the replies. It is as I have feared then. Because I myself have used the tokina on an F90 (but only for three or four films) and never had any problems there. I think I'll go for the Tamron AF XR 28-75mm f/2.8. I've also had better experiences with tamrons than tokinas. I don't use zooms so much to spend all the money needed for the nikon 24-70, so I think the tamron will do just fine.</p>

<p>Hi there, I'm having serious problems with this lense (tokina at-x pro 28-80 f2.8) on my Nikon D700. About one third of the photos with this lens come out blurry. I have bought the lens second hand, but the glass is super clean on both sides, my D700 is brand new and doesn't blur with ANY OTHER lenses that I've tried it with (I've tried about 15 other lenses nikkors and other). Also this blur occurs throughout the f stops (not just wide open at 2.8) and all the range of the lens (from 28 to 80) with no apparent difference and at random light conditions. I've taken the lens to a technician but he didn't have a clue what's wrong with it. If you have any ideas or suggestions they would be very much appreciated, as this situation is driving me crazy. The at-x pro is my standard zoom lens and I can't possibly have it going nuts every 10 shots. I've included two examples of this "blur" effect:</p>

<p><img src="http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k214/tsostorage/blurexample1.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k214/tsostorage/blurexample2.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Consider the Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical [iF]. Extremely cheap option compared to the Nikon lens. But I've tried it on a d200 and a d300 and it's very sharp at 2.8, produces fine colours. Overall I would say it's a very good lens for it price which is around 400 dollars.</p>