|
|
yossarian123
Online
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 9, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 355
|
|
Review Date: Jan 13, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great image quality bordering on the spectacular
Almost as sharp as a prime
Ratio of quality to price is high
|
|
Cons:
|
Flare (buy the lens hood!)
AF hunts in low light
AF not as fast as newer lenses
|
|
I've had this lens for 2 months now and I'm extremely happy with it. You can read the previous reviews here for the background on this lens. For my part, the lens build quality is pro-level - big, heavy, very solid. Image quality is excellent - you're really nitpicking if you can find any faults in the IQ. The big exception to this is lens flare - if you use this near any source of light this lens will flare. Be sure to buy the recommended lens hood if you're on FX (I found it on Adorama used for $12). You can substitute bigger hoods if you're using DX (other lens hood will vignette on the wider ends on FX). I've been using a hood and it really does work wonders.
Backwards compatibility is also a big plus over the 24-70 - I can swap this on my FM2n, N90s, or F4s and it works perfectly.
All in all, this is a great purchase at a great price. If you find one at a reasonable price snap it up. Don't worry about the short zoom range - when walking around I usually carry this, a 24mm, and maybe a 105mm and I'm set.
|
|
 Jan 13, 2010
|
|
Guidenet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 23, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 95
|
|
Review Date: Oct 19, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $751.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp with great contrast. Bright beautiful rendition. 62mm filter thread and bayonet hood. Did I mention that it's very sharp?
|
|
Cons:
|
Not the best bokeh, but not bad. Tends to flare with the sun in the image. Push pull type zoom and front rotates on focus.
|
|
This lens is the predecessor of the 28-70 f/2.8 which is itself the predecessor of the new 24-70 f/2.8. What we are talking about is great pro-level glass. The lens was made from 1987 until 2006 in an AF and AF-D model. The D model has a better coating along with the ability to communicate distance to the camera. Nikon added this D model in 1992 and is the subject of this review. With the advent of the D3 and D700, the price of minty 35-70 f/2.8 AFD models have been soaring lately and I paid too much for my LNIB model. But, I really don’t mind paying for great glass.
This lens is extremely sharp through its entire zoom range except some very slight softness in the extreme borders at f/2.8 and 35mm. I have also rarely seen a lens with such a beautiful contrasty color rendition. On my D700 it fits the bill for my kind of shooting. For slightly over a third the cost of the 24-70, I have a great pro-glass walkaround for vacations and holiday duties.
You get a real aperture ring so will work on your older film bodies and a macro feature. The macro feature isn’t true 1:1 macro and focus is only manual when the macro is enabled which can only be done at 35mm, so good for flowers and such, but not so good for bugs.
The 35-70 is heavy duty pro-build with metal construction unlike many lenses these days, but it’s considerably smaller and lighter than the two lenses that replaced it. It takes a little getting used to the push pull type zoom and the front rotates when it focuses. All in all, I’m extremely happy with this lens.
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2009
|
|
PeepingTom
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 609
|
|
Review Date: Jan 22, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Built like a Rolex, sharp, fast, great colors, wonderful overall image quality...fantastic pro glass for about $ 400!
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2009
|
|
turtle14
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 12, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 236
|
|
Review Date: Aug 30, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp! Great image quality! Solid as a tank
|
|
Cons:
|
HEAVY!
|
|
Image quality with this lens is superb! Extremely sharp from f/4 and up! Can also be had cheap if you shop around for a used version. I found mine from a vendor on amazon. This has become my walkaround workhorse until I can afford to replace it with a 24-70 f/2.8!
Only downside is that it is heavy considering the size of it. Also some people don't like the push-pull zoom, but I don't mind it at all.
|
|
|
Aug 30, 2008
|
|
hakli
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 11, 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $170.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Outstanding sharpness, great colours and nice bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
F2.8 looks bit soft, but F4 and above is razor sharp. Flare is hard to beat sometimes.
|
|
Focal lenght is bit narrow for social shots.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2008
|
|
veroman
Online
Image Upload: On
Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2214
|
|
Review Date: Mar 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
• Super sharp
• Excellent rendering of detail
• Excellent color
• Excellent contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
I haven't owned my Nikon D2x for very long, and the 35-70 f/2.8 is the first lens I bought to use with it. I didn't want a lens that would limit or mask the D2x's potential.
I find the 35-70 to be as perfect a lens as there is. I do believe it surpasses any of the Canon lenses I own and use with my 5D ... and I own some pretty terrific Canon lenses.
Thought it's on the heavy side, I never hesitate to use the 35-70 f/2.8. That's because the results are always excellent. It's an utterly reliable lens and the only lens I've ever owned that is the equal of primes of the same focal lengths, ie 35mm, 50mm, 60mm & 70mm. Simply an outstanding lens.
Now the trick is find a wide-angle zoom and tele-zoom that are of equal quality without going broke.
|
|
|
Mar 6, 2008
|
|
Osprey01
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 11, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 132
|
|
Review Date: Jan 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness
Contrast
Optical Quality
Build Quality.
Value
|
|
Cons:
|
Limited zoom range,
somewhat fiddly zoom (push/pull)
Very fiddly macro mode.
Weighs a lot.
Flare resistance could be better.
|
|
Mine seems ridiculously sharp. Lots of touch up work required on portraits because this shows every little skin blemish and a poor shave. Very impressive. Good build quality. Will work on FX cameras. With continuous focus on and an AF-on button being used, lack of Silent Wave focusing is not a big deal IMO.
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2008
|
|
Jeff Spain
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 15, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $440.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp lens, light, sharp,
|
|
Cons:
|
some flare in front lit situations
|
|
Razor sharp lens! This lens is sharper than my 85mm or my 80-200 mm zoom. Superb IQ. It has the old push pull zoom, but you get use to it. The lens tends to lose contrast when facing into direct light, so use a lens hood or your hand.
This is the best value on pro glass around. For a fraction of the price of the new zooms in this range you can have a pro quality lens. Highly recommend. The 35-70 range is out of favor on DX cameras, so take advantage of the fire sale prices.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2008
|
|
James Markus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2925
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Lens is smaller than the 28-70mm f2.8. Get this lens! Sharp, good contrast and color... best value and quality for the money you could possibly have in this focal range.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 25, 2007
|
|
tmozey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 256
|
|
Review Date: Sep 30, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
This was my most used lens for 15+ years until I jumped to digital. Durable, fast, and reasonably sharp. Handles macro okay too.
|
|
Cons:
|
Mine will no longer focus and repair said this lens had a weakness in that the barrel has many slots that tend to wear out. (Like the repair guy said, after 15+ years, I got my money's worth.) But this might be something to think about if purchasing an old copy of this lens. Was a great focal lenght for film, but for digital I would prefer something wider.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2006
|
|
badplumbing
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 8, 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, contrasty, great depth of field control, light and small enough to carry around on long journeys. Built like a tank.
|
|
Cons:
|
Should be bundled with the lens hood which is a must and can be hard to find.
|
|
A lot of good photographers dismiss this lens as being 'great optically but of limited focal length range'. I have a Leica Sumicron f2.0 35mm Asph lens which the world and his brother raves about as if it were an optical deity and no one says .. "great lens, but it has a limited focal length range". The Nikon lens I have is every bit as good as the Leica lens. Lovely contrast, sharp and generally my absolute favourite lens ever .. and there a lots around second hand. You can get a good 'D' version for under 400 Euro in Europe.
|
|
|
Feb 8, 2006
|
|
Chad Gladstone
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 67
|
|
Review Date: Jan 30, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp and contrasty, great value - a sleeper for the price
|
|
Cons:
|
Limited zoom range; prone to flare
|
|
Sensational lens with a limited zoom range. I have always desired this lens for its optical characteristics and discrete size, but resisted the urge because of the lack of silent wave focusing. With the aquistion of the D200, the focus speed is acceptable and its optical preformance has exceeded my expectation. Its range is perfect for portrait work where space is limited. The lens is well built and quite heavy for its modest size. Be mindful of flaring when shooting in direct sunlight even with the attached HB-1 hood, it can be objectionable. Despite the flaring issue, it is a real bargain and at a third the price of the 28-70, it sacrifices little, if any, preformance to its larger sibling (apart from the obvious lack of af-s and 7mm of wide angle).
|
|
|
Jan 30, 2006
|
|
|
