Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G SAL-70300G
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $900.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight and price
|
|
Cons:
|
Aperture
|
|
|
Well a hope for a newer version of the famous Minolta 70-210/4. I paid without a 2nd thought but the image quality is different. It serves well as a quality general zoom tele.
|
|
|
|
|
Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* SAL-2470Z
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight,
|
|
|
I was surprised for the price I paid and even shocked when I attached it to my A850. Sharp and sharp. It was a bad time that no many people knew about Sony.
|
|
|
|
|
Sony FE 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS SEL2870
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight, inexpensive
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality
|
|
|
A kit lens, so inexpensive it drove me to buy the A7 kit instead of A7r..It is as good as the price is concerned. A very good daily and general use kit lens
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED NIKKOR AF-S
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $4,999.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness, slim size, fast focusing
|
|
Cons:
|
price
|
|
|
It must be the sharpest 24-70/2.8 years back and it proved itself.
The slender shape fit my small hands well.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,199.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Price
|
|
Cons:
|
slow AF, loud focusing noise,
|
|
|
It was a surprise in the market when Nikon launched this lens years back. I could not stop and mounted onto my FM2...ha...it can be better as proven in the 2nd version launched this year.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $899.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, light weight, price
|
|
Cons:
|
Lack of AFS
|
|
|
A great alternative to expensive VR versions
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 60mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $299.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap price
|
|
Cons:
|
Poor resolution, slow and inconstant AF, faint saturation.
|
|
|
My teacher once told me that all macros are sharp. This is an exception.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 60mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Micro-Nikkor
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $879.99
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast focusing
|
|
Cons:
|
expensive
|
|
|
Disappointed by my 60/2.8D macro, my web surfing lead me to this newer version
It is very fast, as fast as Canon 100/2.8 L macro.
Sharpness and saturation are the best I can find
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 85mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Small size, light weight
|
|
Cons:
|
Poor resolution, fair bokeh, poor contrast
|
|
|
After having 85/1.4D, my GAS wanted me to my a smaller parts. Reviews of this lens were rave so it is so attractive, pricewise.
However, the optical resolution does not live up with the reviews.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 85mm f/1.4D IF AF Nikkor
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,099.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, inexpensive, good bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
Can be more contrasty
|
|
|
This is a one of a kind lens. When you want a fast 1.4 portrait for your new FF Nikon, this is the only original Nikon branded one.
Comparing to my new 85/1.4G, the only difference is colour and contrast.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 20mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Small size, light weight
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive, poor contrast and resolution
|
|
|
Dreamed as I have my very first one using on F90X...and at that time this one was so good I urged myself going for a Minolta version
Well entering the digital age newer cameras like D700, D800 demands better optics. This one should be placed in the museum.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2013
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $249.99
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, light weight, fast
|
|
Cons:
|
faint colour, less contrasty,
|
|
|
Having owned Minolta 50/1.7, 50/2.8 Sony 50/1.4, Canon 50/1.4, 50/2.5, I came to my own conclusion that all 50mm lenses are super buy with good quality and feather light weight.
After websurfing for months, I came to my own Nikon 50. This one came to me as surprises. The first was its price. The second was its build quality and the last was its optical quality.
It is not sharp unless you step down to f4.0. Unlike Sony/Canon counterparts, the colour is very faint and contrast very low. I suspect this must be the same in all the D lenses I have....from 20/2.8, 85/1.8, 85/1.4 to 105/2.8 macro.
I have to admit digital cameras have bought us new challenges in lens quality and only a few legend can survive. Obviously this one is not
|
|
|
|
|
