Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2017 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?

  
 
Smousefam5
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


I was looking for a walk-around lens for my newly acquired D600 and came across a Nikon 35-70 2.8D lens in excellent condition for cheap so I grabbed it thinking if I didn't like it I wouldn't have trouble getting rid of it for at least what I paid if not a little more.

I know this was a fairly premium lens in its day but do any of you still have one in your bag and use it regularly?



Aug 16, 2017 at 02:55 AM
mysh
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


I still use this lens and I am a big fan of it. Of course it has some flaws on the newer bodies but I don't find them too bad and I love the overall size and look the lens gives. It has really nice colors and contrast, the size is great and I like having the macro option for some fun.

I mostly use it for street type stuff at this point.



Aug 16, 2017 at 03:01 AM
richardHaw
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


they are pretty good for what they cost these days. i used one for a few years and some of my published photos were taken with one. the only thing i hat is the 35mm widest FL.

when purchasing one, make sure that the AF/MF mechanism, AF and glass is good.

this lens is prone to haze in the middle element and has to be cleaned.



Aug 16, 2017 at 03:24 AM
pr4photos
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


I have one, and its great. Pin sharp for portraits


Aug 16, 2017 at 04:04 AM
Mark_L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


OK in film days, not so much now Even 12mp on my d700 showed it's shortcomings. It flares like crazy too.

Don't hobble good cameras with poor glass.



Aug 16, 2017 at 05:24 AM
jpelt78
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


It's not poor glass. It's not going to have the clinical edge to edge sharpness that is in vogue today. However, It is capable of producing good images and as pointed out above does have a good color rendering. It is a very sharp lens that can still resolve well on high MP bodies. I think we photographers tend to hobble our cameras a lot more than the glass we put in front of them.


Aug 16, 2017 at 05:53 AM
swainsons
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


Great lens, don't use it much but for weddings, and non of my clients have said.... oooooohhhhh, look at the CA in the corners.....


Aug 16, 2017 at 12:01 PM
asaya
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


I own one and use it regularly with D700


Aug 16, 2017 at 09:47 PM
sandycrane
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


This lens can be prone to mechanical and optical problems. I bought a nice looking one from KEH that is virtually useless due to a decentered element.


Aug 17, 2017 at 06:01 AM
Mark_L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


Honestly blows my mind people will spend thousands on a 20MP+ camera and then put a lens like this on it.


Aug 17, 2017 at 06:12 AM
kaplah
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


Mark_L wrote:
Honestly blows my mind people will spend thousands on a 20MP+ camera and then put a lens like this on it.


What? A lens like sharp, light, and fast? Mine worked fine except for the oft-noted flaring and ghosting. In any circumstance where the subject wasn't backlit, it was great.



Aug 17, 2017 at 07:20 AM
jpelt78
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


I hope you took advantage of their return policy and sent it back. It may have been dropped.

My lens had the fogging issue on the cemented pair. (Not sure the cause, there is speculation that past expiration date uv cement may have been used on some lenses. This can affect any of the AF-D lenses that have cemented pairs. I had mine split and recemented and that fixed it good as new. )

sandycrane wrote:
This lens can be prone to mechanical and optical problems. I bought a nice looking one from KEH that is virtually useless due to a decentered element.




Aug 17, 2017 at 07:51 AM
gugs
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


It is an excellent lens, but at the end, I stopped using it and used the first version of the Tamron 28-75 2.8: optically better, more useful range (35mm is a bit long for me), light, compact and cheap. AF is not that fast (similar to the 35-70 2.8). This has been my favorite when I want very good IQ in a light package. Otherwise, I use the 24-70 AF-S.

Guy



Aug 17, 2017 at 08:12 AM
Mark_L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


kaplah wrote:
What? A lens like sharp, light, and fast? Mine worked fine except for the oft-noted flaring and ghosting. In any circumstance where the subject wasn't backlit, it was great.


It works but it is sure as hell not sharp and has 1990s af.



Aug 17, 2017 at 08:51 AM
kaplah
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


Mark_L wrote:
It works but it is sure as hell not sharp and has 1990s af.


Well, my copy was tack-sharp. And 1990's AF is fine on a good body, I never had a problem. And it's cheap, and light, and f/2.8 - did I mention cheap?

I sold mine to avoid the backlighting issues (after an event that was problematic) and to get greater range, replaced it with a 24-120 f/4.

If you don't like it, don't use it, but for some people and their uses it's a sweet spot.





Aug 17, 2017 at 09:31 AM
Smousefam5
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


Mark_L wrote:
Honestly blows my mind people will spend thousands on a 20MP+ camera and then put a lens like this on it.


Except for the fact between the cost of my D600 and the cost of the aforementioned lens I am still well short of a $1000 invested. In fact I just crossed that threshold when you throw in the cost of the 80-200 2.8 I picked up as well which is in near flawless condition.



Aug 17, 2017 at 10:48 AM
Mark_L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


Smousefam5 wrote:
Except for the fact between the cost of my D600 and the cost of the aforementioned lens I am still well short of a $1000 invested. In fact I just crossed that threshold when you throw in the cost of the 80-200 2.8 I picked up as well which is in near flawless condition.


I was referring to the other comments ITT, obviously on a tight budget if this is the best lens you can stick on it it makes sense until you have some more cash.



Aug 17, 2017 at 05:39 PM
ilnonno
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


Smousefam5 wrote:
I was looking for a walk-around lens for my newly acquired D600 and came across a Nikon 35-70 2.8D lens in excellent condition for cheap so I grabbed it thinking if I didn't like it I wouldn't have trouble getting rid of it for at least what I paid if not a little more.

I know this was a fairly premium lens in its day but do any of you still have one in your bag and use it regularly?




You bought it... now use it!
That is really half the fun of trying "new" lenses, to see different renditions and imaging characteristics, and to find out what one likes best (plus, Nikon lenses' rendition can be incredibly different from one another, so it's worth to try as many as possible).

The 35-70 is everything you read in this forum. Yes, it can be very sharp, yes, it has a mellow rendition nice on people, yes, all the defects people wrote are very accurately reported.

I sold my (mint) copy rather quickly (low contrast, flare, poligonaly highlights, 35mm at the widest...), but if you paid little for it, then it's a free rent.
Again: have fun!
Lory

P.s.
I seem to recall that the D600 was also sold in kit with the 24-85VR afs.
Should you grow tired of the 35-70, that seems like a very cheap lens to acquire. Modern, very sharp, and stabilized.



Aug 18, 2017 at 01:36 AM
Panorascal
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Anyone still using a 35-70 2.8 AF-D?


I just finished swapping out all my DX glass in prep for an FX body.
This one was a big component (along with 17-35 2.8 & 80-200 2.8). Got all 3 in great condition for under $1800
Honestly I wouldn't want a basic portrait lens to be any sharper. I really love this lens (No examples guys? pfffft!)
:

?zoom=2&fit=1282%2C1920">



Jul 10, 2018 at 06:18 PM





FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.