 |
Page: 1 · 2
|
|
|
|
camerapapi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 15, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 4923
|
|
Review Date: Mar 30, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, sharp, practical range of focal lengths (conventional cameras)
|
|
Cons:
|
Flare under front lighting (most zooms do) Rotation of the front element.
|
|
|
We all know how popular the 28-105mm lens has become, specially for conventional photography. This lens plays its part and it plays it very well.
It is well made, sharp mainly from f8 to f22 and somewhat soft at large apertures. I think it does very well for a zoom in this range and we all know that zooms are going to have compromises. We are simply exchanging many of the characteristics of a prime lens for convenience.
My best images have come when on a tripod using small lens openings. I like the "macro" function which at least for me has proven to be very useful.
I do recommend this lens.
William Rodriguez
Miami, Florida.
|
|
 Mar 30, 2004
|
|
David R
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 25, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 607
|
|
Review Date: Feb 25, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good size, light, sharp lens, inexpensive.
|
|
Cons:
|
Limited range, rotating front element.
|
|
|
I concur with the previous review (Timm) - he described the lens and it's characteristics well.
I'm never sure how to rate these lenses - it's a good lens, probably not great, but it is great for travel and a terrific performed for the price. For the money I'd rate it great. Relative to the best lenses out there, I'd rate it good.
The lens is sharp, and I carry it all the time when I only one to take one lens. I like the contrast and sharpness better than the 24-120, but have not compared it to the new VR version of that lens.
Macro feature is actually usable in a pinch, but not for true macro. It can focus very close, but as Timm said, bokeh is not the prettyist in macro mode. (Much better to put get a tube or close up attachment or an 85mm or 105mm MF lens.)
I find the AF on this lens very fast on my F100. MF is not great because the focus ring has too little travel. Not an issue if you use mostly AF.
Good lens at a good price, capable of some really good picutres. Much better than any of the consumer zooms. It also is not a G lens, so it'll work on practically any Nikon body. I recommend it highly as a travel and walking around lens.
|
|
|
Feb 25, 2004
|
|
Timm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 4, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 4390
|
|
Review Date: Apr 3, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight, low cost, covers a wide range of common FLs, reasonably sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
Front element rotates when zooming, "crunchy" bokeh, esp. at "macro" ranges and beyond plane of focus.
|
|
|
I've been using this as my main "carry" lens for almost two years now. Combined with my N80, it makes for a light-weight and versatile set-up.
Durability has been very good (so far). This lens has survived several crashes while skiing (carried in chest or fanny pack, unpadded), the odd knock and drop, miles of backpacking in sub-optimal weather, and less than meticulous care - the vehicle I bought at the same time has not fared so well!
I'm pleasantly surpised by the sharpness this lens delivers; while not in the league of the 2.8 ED glass, it's great for the price. Flare and ghosting are acceptable, even 'though the rotating front prevents use of a deep "petal" style hood. Just try to keep direct light off the front glass.
Distortion becomes pronounced above 70mm, and below 40mm, really noticable when trying to hand-stitch panoramas, but good enough for most purposes.
Front element rotation when zooming makes use of polarizing filters a pain.
The f3.5-4.5 maximun aperature limits this lens in portrait and macro aplications when very shallow DOF is desired, and obviously in low-light hand-held shooting.
The "macro" focusing is handy, but not true macro - the manual claims 1:1.2 at 105 mm. I haven't actually measured it.
The bokeh is acceptable through most of the range, with the rounded aperature functioning as claimed, but falls apart at macro focusing distances with FLs of over about 70mm, producing dark-centered out-of-focus highlights and multiple images of out-of-focus linear objects, particularly beyond the plane-of-focus.
Based on my sample size of n=1, I'd say that, all in all, this is a good mid-low priced, lightweight lens for those times that you don't want the weight (or the risk) of ED glass.
Timm.
|
|
|
Apr 3, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
19
|
127227
|
Feb 4, 2015
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$243.91
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.69
|
9.50
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
