deang001 wrote:
Hi. A couple of questions if that’s ok
Does anyone have any thoughts on the 35-70/3.5 Ai-S? Seems decent from the little I’ve found online. 35-70 is about perfect for me as a walk-around lens, and it’s moderately fast for a zoom @ 3.5. I’ll use the macro mode a lot too. I’m not expecting a miracle lens or anything but would like to make sure it’s not a dud.
And also, what focal length do you plug into the camera for a manual lens like this? 50? Or 35, 50 & 70 and use whichever is closest?
Thanks.
Dean I have the AI version and your assessment is about what I would say about it. It’s a decent lens that covers the spectrum for what I use it for, walking around Car shows and similar type events. The lens is one that I’m not excited about for travel since the FL spread is not that great. The 35mm difference can often be accomplished by stepping up closer or back from the object. It does nothing for landscape panoramas. I use 70mm for the CPU setting. Never experimented with it.
It is sturdy and plenty sharp. I would recommend using an HK4 hood or keeping it out of the sun because there is considerable flare coming into its 72mm front lens. Focus throw 0 to ~ is about 90 deg. They can often be found for < $100 and according to Bjorn a little better than the Ai-S.
The macro is something I cannot address since its an Ai and does not have that setting. If it is as good as my 35-200 which does have Macro it should prove useful in a pinch.
deang001 wrote:
Hi. A couple of questions if that’s ok
Does anyone have any thoughts on the 35-70/3.5 Ai-S? Seems decent from the little I’ve found online. 35-70 is about perfect for me as a walk-around lens, and it’s moderately fast for a zoom @ 3.5. I’ll use the macro mode a lot too. I’m not expecting a miracle lens or anything but would like to make sure it’s not a dud.
And also, what focal length do you plug into the camera for a manual lens like this? 50? Or 35, 50 & 70 and use whichever is closest?
Thanks.
I LOVE it Dean! Our paths have probably been crossing on E-Bay because I've been looking at the 35-70 f/3.5... feeling exactly as you do about the focal range. It would be an awesome walk around lens. Funny story... the last time I was shopping for this lens... YEARS ago, I bid on a pristine lens using one of those automatic bidding systems. I lost the bid at the last moment. The next day I lamented the fact I'd missed out and discovered CHUONG was bidding against me. He bought it. I said I missed out by a dollar and he laughed, saying his maximum was higher and no way would a slightly higher bid from me have won the day...
So I'll defer to you at the moment so we're not competing with one another. That said, as I was looking at the gorgeous AI-s lenses, I had a vague recollection that it is the older AI lens that is deemed superior. The AI has a 72mm filter, the AI-s a 62mm. I think it was a review by Bjorn Rorslett that convinced me the older lens is preferable. Here's a link to Bjorn's review of the two lenses...
Just a thought to add to both Ken's and my comments. While the wider lens would be useful in tight situations, which is doubtless the case in rambling around Hong Kong, I've been really appreciating using the 50-135 f/3.5 AI-s as a walk around lens. Both that lens and the 80-200 f/4.5 AI are so well designed optically that the images produced are quite wonderful. I don't know about the 35-70 f/3.5 AI. Of course, for a hundred dollars it isn't horribly expensive to find out. If you buy the lens you can give us a second review.
I don't what it means that I'm once again talking about buying lenses, after concluding some time ago that 47 is enough... perhaps it really IS TRUE...
CGrindahl wrote:
Just a thought to add to both Ken's and my comments. While the wider lens would be useful in tight situations, which is doubtless the case in rambling around Hong Kong, I've been really appreciating using the 50-135 f/3.5 AI-s as a walk around lens. Both that lens and the 80-200 f/4.5 AI are so well designed optically that the images produced are quite wonderful. I don't know about the 35-70 f/3.5 AI. Of course, for a hundred dollars it isn't horribly expensive to find out. If you buy the lens you can give us a second review.
I don't what it means that I'm once again talking about buying lenses, after concluding some time ago that 47 is enough... perhaps it really IS TRUE...
graytrekker wrote:
Here is a photo from yesterday's outing.
It started off with a drive to one of our more popular ghost towns (Garnet) only to find a snowed section of road 2 miles before our destination. So, we turned around and headed down the Bitterroot Valley to hike up to this overlook of Blodgett Canyon. Got there with only a short time before a thunderstorm rolled in (upper left). The light was very challenging. There was a "better" composition at a more dramatic outcropping, but there were other people there, so I looked for an alternate and settled on this - just catching some light before the clouds rolled in.
Took a day off work today, went fishing. Brought the camera and the NC24/2.8 and the 50/2.0 ai a couple of very neat little lenses to bring when out fishing.
If Coronavirus were to be a plant it would be a Dandelion.
Both are pesky, unwanted and a menace.
This one appeared in the last day. I was about to remove it when I saw how perfect it was.
So I popped back indoors to get my camera. A strong gust of wind dispersed this payload just after I had taken a couple of snaps - thus infecting more areas of my lawn. The price one pays.......
CGrindahl wrote:
I LOVE it Dean! Our paths have probably been crossing on E-Bay because I've been looking at the 35-70 f/3.5... feeling exactly as you do about the focal range. It would be an awesome walk around lens. Funny story... the last time I was shopping for this lens... YEARS ago, I bid on a pristine lens using one of those automatic bidding systems. I lost the bid at the last moment. The next day I lamented the fact I'd missed out and discovered CHUONG was bidding against me. He bought it. I said I missed out by a dollar and he laughed, saying his maximum was higher and no way would a slightly higher bid from me have won the day...
So I'll defer to you at the moment so we're not competing with one another. That said, as I was looking at the gorgeous AI-s lenses, I had a vague recollection that it is the older AI lens that is deemed superior. The AI has a 72mm filter, the AI-s a 62mm. I think it was a review by Bjorn Rorslett that convinced me the older lens is preferable. Here's a link to Bjorn's review of the two lenses...
DeltaSigma wrote:
If Coronavirus were to be a plant it would be a Dandelion.
Both are pesky, unwanted and a menace.
This one appeared in the last day. I was about to remove it when I saw how perfect it was.
So I popped back indoors to get my camera. A strong gust of wind dispersed this payload just after I had taken a couple of snaps - thus infecting more areas of my lawn. The price one pays.......
bobbelbob wrote:
Took a day off work today, went fishing. Brought the camera and the NC24/2.8 and the 50/2.0 ai a couple of very neat little lenses to bring when out fishing.
Since George was curious, the lab-box does work, and in fact looking through the reel developed yesterday, I don't see some of the artifacts that the 4X5 sheet developed in the SP-445 tank had.
Aires Automat (yes, the same TLR I had on cam yeseterday), Ilford HP5 Plus, developed in Cinestill Df96 monobath. Scanned on Epson V700. Might try a cheap light table with the Z6 and a macro lens too to compare scans against the Epson.
Macro and Tele is the one lens for the trails you hike, wide landscape to far off vistas PLUS the macro for your flowers.
You're probably right but I have some hesitance about a lens with a variable aperture... a prejudice perhaps. I'm doing some research. Both the 50-135 f/3.5 AI-s and 80-200 f/4.5 AI are such incredible performers I'm having some difficulties with comments about the 35-200. It is a great range but whether I'd use it with its limitations, I'm not certain. I have a few copies on my Watch List on E-Bay. I may take my own advice, saying that spending a hundred bucks to test a lens isn't a terrible thing to do. I appreciate your encouragement Ken... or to quote Laura...
saph wrote:
Since George was curious, the lab-box does work, and in fact looking through the reel developed yesterday, I don't see some of the artifacts that the 4X5 sheet developed in the SP-445 tank had.
Aires Automat (yes, the same TLR I had on cam yeseterday), Ilford HP5 Plus, developed in Cinestill Df96 monobath. Scanned on Epson V700. Might try a cheap light table with the Z6 and a macro lens too to compare scans against the Epson.
Looks great Samy. Now I just have to google all these names and model numbers to see what you are using!
Ken Hill wrote:
Dean I have the AI version and your assessment is about what I would say about it. It’s a decent lens that covers the spectrum for what I use it for, walking around Car shows and similar type events. The lens is one that I’m not excited about for travel since the FL spread is not that great. The 35mm difference can often be accomplished by stepping up closer or back from the object. It does nothing for landscape panoramas. I use 70mm for the CPU setting. Never experimented with it.
It is sturdy and plenty sharp. I would recommend using an HK4 hood or keeping it out of the sun because there is considerable flare coming into its 72mm front lens. Focus throw 0 to ~ is about 90 deg. They can often be found for < $100 and according to Bjorn a little better than the Ai-S.
The macro is something I cannot address since its an Ai and does not have that setting. If it is as good as my 35-200 which does have Macro it should prove useful in a pinch. ...Show more →
Hi Ken.
Thanks for the info. It's always great to hear from someone who has the lens and get their opinion, and if there was ever a place to find someone who owns the lens it would be on this thread
It seems it is pretty decent from what you and others online have said. Thanks for the tip on the flare and using a hood with it. I'll try and find one with a hood. I think I'll still look for the Ai-S version though just for the macro feature. I won't ever be shooting insects with it, but I do enjoy taking closeup shots of food and snacks we have along the way while walking around.
CGrindahl wrote:
I LOVE it Dean! Our paths have probably been crossing on E-Bay because I've been looking at the 35-70 f/3.5... feeling exactly as you do about the focal range. It would be an awesome walk around lens. Funny story... the last time I was shopping for this lens... YEARS ago, I bid on a pristine lens using one of those automatic bidding systems. I lost the bid at the last moment. The next day I lamented the fact I'd missed out and discovered CHUONG was bidding against me. He bought it. I said I missed out by a dollar and he laughed, saying his maximum was higher and no way would a slightly higher bid from me have won the day...
So I'll defer to you at the moment so we're not competing with one another. That said, as I was looking at the gorgeous AI-s lenses, I had a vague recollection that it is the older AI lens that is deemed superior. The AI has a 72mm filter, the AI-s a 62mm. I think it was a review by Bjorn Rorslett that convinced me the older lens is preferable. Here's a link to Bjorn's review of the two lenses...
I love having you play with us again Dean... definitely feels like old times.
I missed Ken's excellent review above... we definitely are all students of such things... learning by DOING. ...Show more →
Hi Curtis.
That's a funny story with Chung, and I'm sure it's happened more than once with people on this thread
Yes, our paths have probably crossed on eBay as well with this lens, but I doubt we'd be bidding against each other as I am after the Ai-S version because of the macro function. I have a couple saved on my watchlist from Japan, but I think I'll take a look at what's available in the local shops here first. I don't doubt the optical quality of anything I buy online, but I'm very particular about the damping of the focus ring. It's got to be just right. Sadly too many of the second-hand photographic stores I used to visit have been pushed out because of increasing rents.
Thanks for the link. I also read on Rockwell's site (is it still blasphemy to mention his name?) that the Ai-S version has "an entirely different optical and mechanical system." It seems like newer isn't always better in this case. I'm sure the Ai-S version will be fine though.
I think 35 at the wide end will be OK for 90% of the situations I like to shoot. I've never really been interested in wide shots unless they are close up street shots of people in tight spots. Maybe I'll keep the 24/2.8 Ai-S in the bag just in case.
Isn't it funny about the manual focus lens kit building? I lasted all of 3 days after shooting these lenses for the first time in years before my mind started wondering about a manual focus zoom
I remember you always found it entertaining that I'd love to clean and look at my lenses all lined up in a row. I did it again on the weekend before taking them out. Link to a pic I took of them with the FE2 below but taken with my iPhone so can't share it properly. But yeah, these lenses are addictive.
