 |
|
|
sparadise
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 261
|
|
Review Date: May 28, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, AF speed, lightness, price
|
|
Cons:
|
None for me
|
|
I picked up a like new D model and I am extremely happy with it. I had previously owned a 70-200 VR and the 80-200 AF-D. This is not a focal length I shoot with very often so this lens fits my needs perfectly. For the comments that this lens is too heavy try lugging around the 2.8's
IQ on my D700 is excellent. AF is as fast as any AFS lens I own. I think this makes a great travel lens and would recommend it highly.
|
|
 May 28, 2009
|
|
NaturesEssence
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 3, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
build quality, fast autofocus, sharp, price
|
|
Cons:
|
little heavy compared to kit telephoto zoom now adays
|
|
Got a D version of this. I can say its really good! Its Built like a tank gun, metal everywhere thus the heaviness. Auto focus is EXTREMELY fast for such a low priced telephoto, its perfect for shooting birds at flight in daylight. Sharpness is good. I compared to my 28-200mmG @200mm f/5.6, the 70-210mm beats it in edges by whole lot. Centre remains nearly identical. The push and pull isnt that bad once u get used to it. Only thing i dont like is the weight, not very good if your going for a long walk, but then again its all metal so heaviness is expected.
|
|
|
Aug 3, 2008
|
|
hakli
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 11, 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very usable wide open between 70-150mm . Looks soft at 210mm. Stepping down to F8 gives razor sharp photos at all focal lenghts. Build quality is very good. Push-and-pull is not for me, but still OK.
|
|
Cons:
|
@210mm images look soft at wide open, F8 helps a lot.
|
|
My lens is no D-model, but only difference is focus speed, non-D is slower.
Sunny day and aperture F8 gives a wonderful shots. Build quality is very high comparing to nowadays lenses.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2008
|
|
Dirk Hiemstra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 22, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 28, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Price on second hand market
|
|
Cons:
|
Not that sharp, lacks a bit of contrast
|
|
Nice lens, but can't compete the newer Nikon stuff. Especially sharpness and contract are a bit disappointing. In general the low cost plastic 80-200 gives sharper pictures and the 28-200G or 18-200VR is a far better choice.
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2007
|
|
PJ Fish
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 24, 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Nov 3, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
A very good zoom; Best Buy and very very fast AF(good for sports) i got the D model which is super fast and make awesome good pics.
|
|
Cons:
|
push pull design,little ackward.
|
|
This Nikkor 70-210 D model is a good zoom for the price.
Its not a Nikkor 80-200 or 70-200 of course but its better and more valuable than the 70-300 and 3 party manufacturers products ;its recomandable anytime and you will not be dissapointed with it.You can also use it for sports !
I use it with any Nikon DSLRscams when i travel or hike and find it very good.
Well made Nikon !
|
|
|
Nov 3, 2007
|
|
Jon Delorey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
I've owned this lens for 16+ years and it is still working fine. Picture quality is excellent.
|
|
Cons:
|
autofucus can sometimes be slow ..or confused..
|
|
I was very surprised to run across any kind of review of this lens. I bought the non D version back around 1990 for the N6006 that I owned at the time. It was quite inexpensive but it fit my budget and the picture quality was just great.
I am now using it on my D200 and it still works great. I recently shot horses show jumping and the focus tracked them just fine. In situations where the autofucus does get confused I just make a quick switch to manual focus.
When I bought the lens many reviewers disliked the sliding zoom, but I have found that it can come in very handy when you need to zoom real fast during action shots. When I've done a very sudden zoom during continuous mode the focus and everthing kept up without a problem.
I don't know exactly what I did pay for the lens back in 1990 (around $150), but it has been a great value for the money.
|
|
|
Oct 10, 2006
|
|
rootrider
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 12
|
|
Review Date: Jun 19, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $110.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
good speed, good value, good quality, good feel, takes great pictures, decent bokeh, not too large or heavy. Just an overall great lens!
|
|
Cons:
|
Front element rotates while focusing. Weird filter size. Push-pull may be a bit of a negative. non-D focuses to infinity and back *very* slowly.
|
|
I've had this lens for just over a month now. I got it used on KEH for $130 shipped. I have the non-D version. The D version simply has a more quickly geared auto-focus motor which would be very nice to have, but I can live without it for the price that I paid for this thing. It seems like it takes forever for this lens to focus to infinity and back if it can't focus the first time around.
All I can say is that I'm very happy I bought this lens. I like it more every time I use it. The f/4 is quite acceptable at 70mm and f/5.6 isn't all that bad at 210mm. It's a relatively sharp lens with good color and resolution.
The lens is built well and handles well. I actually kind of like the push-pull zoom since it's rather smooth and quick to use. The filter size is 67mm which is kind of weird for a Nikon lens.
It's a great cheap lens.. but it's also a lens that can compete well with other options in the $500+ range today. If you're considering it just save yourself the time and pick one up. You won't regret it.
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2006
|
|
Laurens
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 16, 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 13
|
|
Review Date: May 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, very solid construction, I actually like the push-pull mechanism
|
|
Cons:
|
overrated
|
|
Ken Rockwell published a glowing review about the 70-210 on his web site and this is probably one of the reasons why this lens is somewhat overrated, if you ask me. I have the non-D version version which is optically identical to the D-version (which focusses faster).
I am actually happy with my 70-210. It 'feels right' and has a built quality that todays entry-level lenses don't have anymore. I bought a Nikon 70-300G, compared it to my 70-210 and got rid of the 70-300 within a week. The 70-210 was way better throughout its range, especially wide open.
When I compare the 70-210 with the 18-70 at 70 mm however, I think the D70 kit lens is a bit sharper and has better contrast and colour. I did some comparisons with my 180 mm Sigma macro as well and the Sigma is clearly superior. Both the kit lens and Sigma macro come with a nice hood, something that I only started appreciating after noticing the drop in contrast of the 70-210 whenever sunlight hit its filter. Fortunately I found a cheap 1 euro hood that solved that problem.
The 70-210 is an OK-lens if you are searching for a cheap second hand tele that is build well, offers decent performance through its range and will serve you until Nikon finally releases a 70-300 lens with really good optics. It is a fine lens but don't pay a ridiculous 'Rockwell-tax' for it.
|
|
|
May 28, 2006
|
|
mctenhov
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 22, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very fast focus, build quality, sharp, price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Hard to find, only F4.0-5.6. So almost useless in low light situations. Images are mostly a bit underexposed, but this can be easily corrected in PS.
|
|
I bought this lens for my D50 after I read the reviews here and at kenrockwell.com. It's a surprisingly sharp lens, focusses very fast, and has almost no CA. Highly recommended for outdoor use. Build quality exceeds every new lens in the 200$ range! Why did Nikon discontinue this one?!? Because it's to much for the money?
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2006
|
|
Petrus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 17, 2005
Location: Poland
Posts: 160
|
|
Review Date: Oct 25, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price!!! Just as said: you get it for steal... Best compact telephoto zoom!
Reasonably sharp wide open, sharp closed down 1 stop, surprisingly sharp at f/8-f/11. Build quality - metal+glass+Made in Japan... good old days... AF speed. If 2.8 pro zooms hurt your neck 70-210 is much lighter and more compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
I wish it could be 80-200 2.8 or 70-210 VR... :-)))... same size, same price... just kiding...: NONE FOR THE PRICE!!!
|
|
(This review is for non D version but there is no optical difference).
I used to have it on my F-801s but had sold them both few years ago. After I bought D70 last year I relly missed more range... and just recently managed to buy an almost brand new, unused for ridiculous ~100$(!!!!!!!).
Good things are said on it at kenrockwell and it's just true :-).
If you can't afford or don't need heavy pro league 2.8 zooms and are not satisfied with 70-300 (ED or G) find 70-210, give it a shoot, and never sell like I did...
For the price of a toy you get a real Nikkor.
Highly recommended!!!
|
|
|
Oct 25, 2005
|
|
chinesestunna
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 308
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, performance, weight
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit soft wide open, speed even at wide open
|
|
I've used this lens for 3-4 months now as my workhorse telezoom, and it has met my expectations as an excellent telezoom for the beginner or someone on a budget.
Distortion: very low at all focal lengths, besides, this is a telephoto, not like we're doing architecture or something.
Focus Speed: very very snappy, for a non AF-S, this is as good as it'll get  extremely fast in a way that will make all other non AF-s seem really slow
Flare/Ghosting: very good, I don't have an issue with this unless shooting almost directly at the sun, and I don't have the hood!
Chromatic Aberration: this is non-ED, so you will get some in high contrast shots, but shoot NEF and use Camera Raw or whatever post processor you want and you can get rid of them, I did
Build Quality: Pretty damn good, especially in today's world of plastic (nothing again the material, just the feel of some lenses) lenses, this is metal, so you can beat people with it  hehe, j/k
Sharpness: Decent wide open, but stop down to F8 and you'll just make images that cuts through anything, very very sharp
Handeling: I'm not a fan of push-pull zoom, but for the price, what can I say, I'll learn and it is growing on me
***OVERALL***
I like it a lot, don't expect 80-200 F2.8 stuff from it obviously, take care to shot in well lit areas so you can stop down for that sharpness
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2005
|
|
obelix
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jun 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 183
|
|
Review Date: Feb 10, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, very fast focus, excellent sharpeness and contrast, all metal body
|
|
Cons:
|
Push pull zoom can suck in dust.
|
|
The best budget priced telephoto zoom lens out there. Excellent sharpness and contrast. Decent bokeh and very good build quality.
Ken Rockwell swears by this lens. Very rarely does this lens show up in keh.com and it is usually snapped in a day or two.
With a 4 feet minimum focus distance, it can be used for quasi macro photos as well.
Strongly recommended.
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
