Awesome video. Helped me a lot with great information. Thank you very much for doing it . Well done

The 35mm 1.8g DX is very usable on modern FX bodies, even without the crop mode, you just have to live with the slight vignetting /Holga effect at a certain shooting distance, it's not really of an issue once you get used to it, and it is much much sharper than the old 35mm f2

Novembre 2022 and still own a D700 for my wed backup camera with a 24mm f/2.8 DC lens, an AMAZING COMBO

I have just purchased the D700 and am looking for a lens and Thanks to you are excellent video I now know that I will get the 35-70 Nikkor, I have just sold of my DX lens and camera to go full frame, my previous set up was the D300 with the Nikkor 17-55 F2.8 so you can see I am looking for quality in my full frame lens and this 35-70 looks great to me. Thank You very much for a great video. Terry.

I like how the nikon D700 is just there looking great! Even today in 2021 is an awesome camera

Here's what I wish someone had told me: 1) Put A LOT of thought into what subject matter you will be shooting most often. For example, If you mostly shoot your kid's soccer games, you will most certainly have to have a fast (f/2.8 or wider) prime or telephoto lens of at least 200mm and you may even want 300mm, and most likely with VR. Yes, today's cameras can handle high ISO's however, for indoor sports and night games, there is no substitute for 'fast glass'. Conversely, if you mostly shoot buildings or real estate, you may find that you do not need any lenses beyond about 50mm or 90mm focal length. 2) NEVER duplicate focal lengths. For example, if your buy a 28-200mm zoom lens, do NOT turn around and buy a 35-70mm zoom. You already have those focal lengths covered. 3) If you even THINK you miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight want to shoot 35mm film at some point in the future, and you have a Nikon digital camera, do NOT buy a lens with the letter "G" in it's description. It will not be fully functional with most of Nikon's classic 35mm film cameras. Get the "D" lenses. They are bargains AND unless you're shooting professionally, you will not notice or care about the negligible increase in sharpness that SOME newer lenses have. New is not necessarily better. A lot of pro photographers will swear that some of the old, manual focus Nikkor lenses from 30+ years ago, are among the sharpest 35mm lenses Nikon (or anybody this side of Leica) ever made. I have a 30+ year old 28mm AI-s, manual focus Nikkor that's sharper than Vermont cheddar. That damn thing is ||

@streebadrift5059

5 жыл бұрын

Alderman Fred C. Davis what lens is best for modeling? I’m getting a Nikon D700 soon and I want to know which lens is best for me

@OhDearBabajan

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for this info!!!

Yes, not all cheaper lenses are suitable. But I can assure you the 35mm f2D and 50mm 1.8G at f/2.8 will be sharper than the pro 24-70mm corner to corner. The 35-70 comes close (especially at the center) as it was also a pro lens back in the days. The 28-200 is a superzoom and we shouldn't expect great optics from it, except it's great as a light travel lens.

Nice video and advice, I've had my D700 from new in 2009, but kept my eye on eBay for years to get my glass collection, and have the original 24-70 and 70-200 VR lenses for bargain used prices.

Good video. I actually have an affinity to constant apertures, but I say you can still manage that wide to tele under 1K, my setup: D700, 17-35 2.8, 35-70 2.8, 70-210 2.8

MirrorlessReviews...what a name for a channel reviewing DSLRs :) So this video is from 7 years ago and I own a Fuji XT2 with some glass but recently, I have had a look at how affordable full-frame bodies were down to. Be it the 5D MkII or the 6D or even, as in this video, the D700. The glass you are showing here, today would set you back at $850... With a D700 at $365, that brings back full-frame and quality glass in the market. Great review, thanks :)

Nice review. Nice to get ideas of good lenses but on a budget.

Hey, I know you are busy can you make a video on this legendary camera (if you still have it) and some of the other lens options as there are extremely few videos on D700 compared to other cameras that came after it, thanks

I have the 50mm lens, it is brilliant. I will look into a few of the other here. Thanks!

Good video. I have or have had all those lens. Well worth the price. I also have the 85mm af d. Very nice portrait.

Thanks. Great older Nikkor FX Lens recommendations for Nikon Full-Frame cameras with built in screw focusing mechanism. For those on a budget but still need Nikkor quality.May I also suggest the Nikkor AFD 70-210mm lens, not a f2.8 but at a lighter weight and size, all metal and really focus fast at about $200-$300 on eBay

Thanks for sharing, perfect guidance

Great review.. good tips... Thanks a ton !

Excellent picks!

I got lucky at a local shop and found the last screw drive version of the 80-200 2.8D for $500. It's got a built in irremovable tripod foot I always have to rotate out of the way so I can support that metal and glass with my free hand. It's a very exciting lens to use because I mostly use it for fast action, there's no delay or hesitation in AF it just snaps from target to target. Probably my sharpest zoom lens as well.

Great video man

Nice good descriptive video!

Great video. If you could get either a 50mm 1.8g, or a 50mm 1.4d, both for the same price, what would you recommend, for use on a d700? Thanks

Very useful video. Thank you.

In this case, cheaper doesn't mean less resolution. All of these lenses (except maybe 28-200mm, but that's expected) have excellent MTFs. They are very sharp even for APS-C sensors such as D7000, which has about the same pixel pitch as D800.

You can also get the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 for about $150 brand new! It's the older version that doesn't have a built in motor in the lens (Because you'll be using your body's motor to auto focus, so it's all good!) I have that one for my film camera. Works great and is super cheap too! :D

Can you please suggest lenses covering range as from 16-18mm to 200-300mm for d7100.

I have no doubt that this is a great video and those are all great lenses. But I'm a landscape guy and none of those lenses look wide enough for landscapes. You could make an argument for the 28-200..... but I would probably trade in the 35mm f2 and go for something a little wider. What do you recommend?

I would swap out the 35 for something wider, get a cheap ultrawide such as a 20mm, and instead of the 28-200 get the 70-210 f4, or even a used 3rd party f2.8 70/80-200 used which *occasionally* go for $300-$400

This is a great review. I would suggest looking into Nikon 24mm f/2.8 instead of 35mm lens. Another lens that could be a nice alternative (to 28-200 G) is an older 28-105. It is cheaper and it has a macro mode at 105mm.

@PHOT0GUY

8 жыл бұрын

+Vitaliy Gyrya The 28-200mm G also has "macro" and will focus down to 1.4 feet at all focal lengths and unlike the 28-105mm you do not have to move a switch to get into close focus mode

@TheVitalishe

8 жыл бұрын

PHOT0GUY That looks like an interesting lens. I would love to try it out. Meanwhile I can only compare them based on online reviews. And it seams like there were some compromises made to double the range. Whether those are acceptable or not I cannot judge before paying with it myself.

@PHOT0GUY

8 жыл бұрын

+Vitaliy Gyrya Be aware that there is some sample variation. The lens I have is not as sharp on the left edge on full frame wide angle until stopped down a few stops. It is very handy having the close focus at 200mm though as it lets you be a little further from insects etc when doing close ups. A big bonus is that it only weighs 13 ounces.

@colblimp

8 жыл бұрын

I had the 24mm f2.8 when I had my D700 and when I first turned pro and it's a superb lens.

Non D lenses don't transmit distance information to the camera, so auto flash photography would be more difficult. Other than that it's usually the same optics.

Nice video! I have a D60. I just purchased the 1.4 G 50 mm. I opted for the 1.4 over the 1.8 because I perceived the 1.4 to have a better build quality. The 1.4 was $200 more. Love the clarity of the photos.

@terryallen9546

4 жыл бұрын

I hope you sent $400 and bought D700, also.

I would really recommend just the tamron 28 70 g2 used. On dx its range from 36 to 105, all at f2.8. Instead of having multiple lenses, a used cost of around 850 usd is actually a much headache free decision for both dx and fx owners. I have 35mm, 50mm, 85mm. All those primes might be gone now after I bought the tamron. No need to go about changing lenses.

I don't see any wide-angles? At least 24mm?

Very nice video, informative and comprehensive, and obviously from an honest guy. Thank you.

Great video.

Hi, I am currently browsing Ebay for this lens. I come across a lot of 35-70 2.8 (Without the D). Can you please advise whether this "non D" lens is as good as the one you are describing in the video? Thanks for your reply! Mitch

Yes, I recommended the 50mm 1.8G instead of 1.8D because of its superior sharpness (due to Asph elements) and much better bokeh rendition. It's also got full time MF override.

.. thanks for this very cool tip.

There is a 35-70 3.5 but I'm not sure if there is 35-70 2.8 non-D.

It's 2021 and I'm still using my D700 and I wouldn't consider the 28-200 f/3.5-5.6G lens because it doesn't have VR but in 2021 Nikon mirrorless bodies have IBIS which would solve the lack of VR. If it were me I'd get the 50 f/1.8G because of upward compatibility with newer Nikon bodies that don't use the in camera focus motor. Yes the 35-70 f/2.8D is an awesome lens, I've made money using that lens but like all push-pull lenses it will introduce dust to the image sensor. I agree with you that the 35 f/2D is an awesome lens and I prefer it to the 50 f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4G lenses I own but I replaced it with the much better 35 f/1.8G which is also compatible with Nikon's Z mount!

@iqramyusoff1237

2 жыл бұрын

Hi. Im just started using D700 upgraded from D90. What will the best budget telephoto lens that will work well for D700?

Will return to mirrorless reviews very soon, with an upcoming OM-D EM5 review...

consider the nikon 24-85 VR G 3.5 4.5 for 400$ . its sharpest mid range zoom

@tclarke971

6 жыл бұрын

I keep hearing good things about this lens.

@firegoat73

5 жыл бұрын

I recently got this lens and I love it.

@garys.674

4 жыл бұрын

David Duong the 18_35 is nice too

Increasing ISO lets you use a faster shutter speed.

Hi, thanks for sharing. I have a D610 but I only have DX lenses, will these lenses get rid of the crop factor issue and take advantage of the full frame feature? I did not understand if these are FX lenses... Thanks!

@ChristopherFynn001

3 жыл бұрын

These are all FX

I have the 50mm 1. 8g for my d750, was looking at the 24-85 vr 3.5-4.5 as my walk around lens for the wider angle part, maybe the 18-35? Idk yet though. I want a good street walk around general lens for no more than 250

@johnlitchfield4815

4 жыл бұрын

F you do go for this lens, pay a little more and get the vr version we good lens

How many lenses are needed to cover 35-50 range? I believe there is a lot of redundancy in these selections. Better to cover ‘ultra’ or ‘wide’, mid prime, tele, super tele… pick 3 or 4 carefully and you cover 10/20 to 200/300mm for under $1000...

What about the 50 1.8d?

2021,still useful information.

Everyone forgets about these 2 budget, but outstanding Nikkor lenses. The 28-80mm f3.3 - 5.6 G and the 80-200mm f4.5 - 5.6 D Sure they are plastic but the glass is what counts. The 28-80mm has only 6 elements in it the same as the 50mm f1.8 D Insanely sharp. The 80-200mm will stun anyone with it's sharpness and great color rendition. You can get the 28-80mm for $40 and the 80-200mm for $50 in good or better condition.

what is the cost of that 700 new ?? with no lens.

Which one of these would you use for portrait shots the 50mm or ?

@terryallen9546

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, the 50. But I like the 85 af d better for portraits.

Yes. I'm more starting out in photography. I want to expand my lens upgrades to and old but pro setup and this video helped me. I have an 18-200mm f5.6 DX and a 50mm f1.8 G. I am investing on the 80-200 f2.8 you displayed here, as it has a fast aperture and appears to also be macro capable.

My lens lineup is as follows Nikon 20mm 1.8 Nikon 40mm 2.8 DX (Marco Only) replacing with the 35mm F/2D NIkon 50mm 1.8G Nikon 85mm 1.8G Cost me $1150.00 total I shoot with a D810 and a D3400 I got all these at bargain prices even though the 20mm/85/mm cost a pretty penny...

Hi, any alternative for my d7000? Looking for a fixed 2.8 zoom 50/70 max lenght but hard to find. 28 on DX isn't wide, any old Af zoom starting from 17 or 24? Cheap, under 150€

@leoborn6595

6 жыл бұрын

nerd Mike Theres nothing with 2.8 for this price. You can take a look on the Nikon 18-70mm 3.5-4.5. This costs in good condition around 100$.

@nerdMike

6 жыл бұрын

Leo Born do you mean af-s version? Atm I bought a used 18-55vr 2 for 40€, with uv filter and caps, like new. 👍 mainly because of vr, 70 4.5 hard to use indoor and on low light situations.

@leoborn6595

6 жыл бұрын

nerd Mike Okay, for 40 bucks its definitely a great choice! And VR is always great.

@nerdMike

6 жыл бұрын

it's fine and very silent :)

Great video. Very well stated.

you always mentioned "made in Japan"... does it matter if made somewhere else?

I am about to purchase a D7100. If you could pick only one, what would it be? I need all around kicker, meaning, a bit of a portrait, automobile photograph, etc. Do you think I would be good with the 35-70 or you would suggest me something else? Budget of about $400 ..

@PHOT0GUY

8 жыл бұрын

the 18-200mm would be a good general purpose lens and if you buy used you would probably have enough left over for a prime lens too.

@nikolajovicic174

8 жыл бұрын

Thanks man!

Yes, the D7000 has about the same amount of pixels per square centimetre BUT its a CROP sensor camera and all those nasty things take place outside that crop area.

The 80-200 is one of the best lenses I’ve ever tried it’s amazing. But it has no VR and it’s heavy to hand hold. You can get them cheaper than 1000. Also it has no focus breathing. It’s so good it’s scary.

@alexblaze8878

10 ай бұрын

Agreed! It’s one of the only zoom lenses I recommend. Sharp as a tack and built like a tank not to mention much cheaper than the 70-200 2.8! I own about 45 lenses and the 80-200 is always my go-to for moderate telephoto uses. I love my 300mm 2.8 but it’s so big and heavy it’s hard to use handheld without a monopod/tripod.

If you pay for them, I will be happy to get both 24-70 and 70-200. In fact I will also get 14-24 and the new 80-400 :-) But seriously, full frames becoming more and more affordable. Why shouldn't I get a used D700 for around $1,300 without having to spend another $1,500 on either 24-70 or 70-200?

Hi, I notice you haven't been releasing new videos lately, I find most of your videos to be very informative and contains accurate info, like the one above with more than 110,00 viewers. I am a subscriber and not hesitate to produce more videos I will be watching.

@MirrorlessReviews

8 жыл бұрын

Thanks. Gotten busy with work ;)

Awesome job done explaining capabilities of these lenses. I didn't even know some of them existed...

Thinking in buy the 35-70mm f/2.8, i'm seeing in multiple videos a good review of this lens, a cheap middle range lens, so perfect... Now talking about the 80-200mm f/2.8 i bought the push&pull version in december for $370 and its the same lens of the video, i recommended the push&pull version, it's more cheaper and still luminous and having a great quality.

You could go for the Voightlander 20 f/3.5. It has a very slick and smooth manual focus ring and is pretty sharp in the corners around f8-f11. 400$ used.

will these work on nikon d3200

@Poopbagsteve

8 жыл бұрын

+nikolas gomez jaramillo nope, you need an intern focus mechanism. d 7xxx and above

Thanks for your review...the only lens I would stay away from is the 35-70 2.8. I know it is an awesome lens but it is so fragile as far as getting moister in it, which leads to the fogging issue in it. Not to mention the balsam separation.You could only use it in the best of conditions or indoors..I am sure there are people that will say they have had their for a long time and had no problems but there are more people that have had real issues with it and to buy one now with no issues is hard to find.

If you want to keep the budget low then I'd recommend the 24mm f2.8D. It's a very sharp lens and will give you the wide angle. Of course there is always the 14-24mm 2.8G but it's very expensive.

I have the same 35-70mm 2.8 zoom lens. But I have a problem with it, sometimes when i put my aperture at f2.8, and zoom in or out, the aperture automatically jumps to f3.5, and i can't put it back to f2.8, I have to undo the lens and put it back on. ever had the same thing with yours?

@Dingosean

10 жыл бұрын

Check your aperture ring. Might be getting caught.

@letsnot-_-4436

10 жыл бұрын

then that means it not a variable lens not a constant one the more you zoom out the slower it gets

@Friskyprod

10 жыл бұрын

Calvin Murphy It is a constant aperture, believe me.

@letsnot-_-4436

10 жыл бұрын

ok :) do you have an APSC sensor?

@letsnot-_-4436

10 жыл бұрын

***** ok :) do you have an APSC sensor?

will the 28-200mm lens work with nikon d610?

@PHOT0GUY

8 жыл бұрын

Yes, I often use one with my D600

@Fosi94

7 жыл бұрын

Yes

Great review of affordable quality Nikon lenses.If I can add anything positive to your review its lenses with vr capability.This vr alone has changed my entire photography profession to where I will not buy a non-vr lens again if possible.Although I do own and use a 50mm f/1.8g and when needed will bring my 12-24mm f/2.8 when weight is not a consideration,when it is the vr 16-35mm f/4 is in bag. I love not having to carry a tripod anymore.My big bag now usually has a 16-35mm vr,28-300mm vr and 1.8g nifty fifty.Used from ebay for less tan 1800$.I realize that's considerably more money but picture quality is there and I get to run and gun much more often.I realize Nikon's QC has been questionable as of lately but it appears to me Canon glass is just to expensive and has too many gaps in there lens lineup,this is what , especially lately with their QC problems has kept me with Nikon.Ive also noticed most of the new fx bodies are now compatible with almost all Nikon lenses made in last 50yrs.I am by no way dis agreeing with you Nikon lens selection is so wide you got to keep your ears open to help pick up any pointers on any hidden gems.I'm wonder how many compatible lenses are out there for my d610.Your article really got my brain cells excited.Thanks for article!

This is a great video. Thanx for putting it out there. i wish i saw this when i was picking up my lenses. I did go with the 28-200 3.5-5.6g as my first lens. I was spoiled by trinity glass afterward and blew my budget. You should not some of the cons of the lens you mention to better understand their pricing. I believe the 35-70 has hazing problems on select serial numbers due to the cement on the lens degrading. all the best, keep up the good work

Couldnt find any of your recommended lenses on Nikon web site. Are they still on sale?

@colblimp

9 жыл бұрын

Most are very old and therefore discontinued. That push/pull lens is no good - technology is too old and glass nowhere near as good as newer products.

@Icanhasautomaticcheeseburger

9 жыл бұрын

colblimp Umm... you ever use it? Optically, it's about the same as the 28-70, which ain't exactly a piece of crap. Oh, and it's less than half the price and a lot smaller.

I agree that if your are a regular consumer who is shooting their family vacation, the 70-200 and the 24-70 may be too big and expensivefor you. But when your shooting to sell to a client, there is no way im trusting a cheapo wide angle to telephoto zoom lens.

needs more prime

Your recommendation goes against the review of Kent Rockwell. It seems that the G version is adding more distortion on FX camera and has mostly no advantage else that having an internal AF. I'm going to buy one of these lenses tomorrow(!). I was about to buy the D model.

a person could save even more by considering 'af (non-d)' versions of lenses. all that 'd' adds is the possibility of 3d-matrix metering and distance information for the flash, which i guess only matters if you're shooting through a mirror. they auto-focus slowly, but so does the af-d version, relative to af-s. here are the prices i scored on adorama and ebay, respectively nikon ed 80-200 2.8 af (non-d) $300 nikkor 50 1.4 af (non-d) $130 i haven't found any parallel bargains at the wider end. the do-it-all 28-200 would take the fun out of the kit for me; i wouldn't take it off the camera. plus it's too slow to be a bargain for $300. of course the dx 35 1.8 af-s ($120) is a no-brainer if you're shooting dx. otherwise it seems like you have to go manual focus or third party or give up the pro level speed.

2.45 happens to the best of us!

There can be issues with cheaper lenses when you use the latest D800/D800E because they give such a good resolution that you differences between the lenses.

what's the difference between DX and FX lenses ?

@makalu69

8 жыл бұрын

+Kyle Roxx DX are for cropped frame sensors (D3xxx, D5xxx,, D7xxx) and FX is for Full frame cameras (D6xx, D7xx, D8xx etc).

@PHOT0GUY

8 жыл бұрын

You can use FX lenses on DX cameras and FX cameras but if you use a DX lens on an FX camera you will usually get a lot of vignetting unless you just use the central portion of the image. The only major difference is that an FX lens will produce an image that covers a larger area than a DX lens (to cover the FX sensor). Magnification is identical though e.g. a 50mm FX lens will produce the same size image on a DX sensor as a 50mm DX lens would.

@rodrigopages1054

8 жыл бұрын

you can use fx lenses on dx but you have to account for the 1.5x crop due to dx being smaller than full frame (FX) you can use both type of lenses on FX cameras and but the DX ones will be used on DX crop mode on your camera to avoid vignetting, the other way works perfect no vignetting and gives you de advantage to keep the lenses for a future upgrade to a full frame camera and use them at their full potential and at their actual focal length ;)

very usefull !!

Im in agreement with the use of cheaper lenses where you can, without sacrificing on quality. I love using primes for newborn and baby shoots, but cheap zooms, I'm not so sure. It all depends on your application. My favourite lens is the 24-70, but my cheapy 50mm 1.8 af-d gives beautiful images and good bokeh on the D700

Great reviews. Also great for folks with a D7000 and up crop sensor camera who plan to add a full frame to the stable later. I might downgrade my 50mm selection to a used 1.8mm for $80. And try to find a used 80-200mm f2.8 (TheBeast) used. I got a used one for $450, 4 years ago. Or do the used nifty 50 and upgrade to the 70-300mm with VR. You can now get a D7100 for $500 or less. I would use either combo for soccer or low light situations where reach is a factor. The 800-200mm lens is effectively a 120-300mm at 2.8 and the 70-300mm VR is 105-450mm on the D7nnn cameras. I am very happy with indoor club shots on a D750 at up to 3200 iso on with TheBeast. I have shot 1000s of NCAA women’s soccer photos with TheBeast day and night on a D750. Mostly from behind the goal out to 50 yards. I prefer imag shots. I have also shot length of the field shots handheld on a D7100 with the 70-300mm VR. Still had to crop a little, but that’s on a 140 yard field goal to goal. There is a reason nikon made the D500. Crop sensors rock for sports because who can afford a $7000 lens? A 200 shot RAW buffer?

interesting video but if money is an issue why not just get a d3100 w/ kit lens and the 55/200 and go have fun this setup in capable hands can do wonders. Our cameras are just tools some tools preform better than others. Some jobs need better tools. but I respect his pov and it's works for him.

@wyatt.photos

10 жыл бұрын

I agree, because FX is expensive, but point being if you need to, you can spend 1k on FX lenses. Although with lenses this crappy (minus the primes), it's pointless having the FX body... Sooooo I guess I agree hahahahaha

@brianminkc

9 жыл бұрын

the d3100 is not in the same class as the D700 with these lenses. Your comparing consumer stuff with Pro stuff. There is a reason they are in different classes.

@Mrmilbeijos1

9 жыл бұрын

of course it's not the same class, that's not the point. a lot of people get all caught up in "oh I must have a D3 and the Holy trinity" to be a great photographer, when the sad fact is with several grand worth of gear and a lousy shooter you still get bad photos. but some think it's all about the gear not what's behind the gear.

@edwardsie1042

9 жыл бұрын

Firstly, all the D lens in this video is sharp from end to end, by only using 35mm and 50mm mostly can done all the standard job.. professional prefer prime over zoom.. Second, getting power D prime and put on FX its tottaly different level.. even the sensor also affecting the picture sharpness, colour contrast and etc.. and for those always shoot under super low light, its DX is totally useless, except you do it for ur own hobby.. Doest mean that i say you are wrong, but its depend what kind of job u doing, for professional studio work, even using D3000 and 18-55 kit lens with good studio lighting, is far more enough. But when at field shooting such as wedding, the camera performance will be more important. but that 28-300 serious crap~

Does it work the other way around? So fx lenses on dx bodys?

@GOWZDAWG19

9 жыл бұрын

All FX lenses will work on any DX bodies, just add the x1.50 crop factor. For example: 24mm FX lens it will become 36mm if you put on a DX body. If you use a DX lens on a FX body you'll get a black crop around the edges of your viewfinder and you won't be able to use the full potential of a full frame sensor but it'll work.

@ncjpg

9 жыл бұрын

***** OH ok thanks man :)

Or pick two prime lenses of your choice then go out and shoot... The situation will tell you to shoot your best pictures with those two lenses 🙂😉

MirrorlessReviews :D !!!

I use the 35-70 instead of my 24-70 G AF-S when taking into situations where the more fragile / expensive lens could be damaged. It performs very well in comparison and with the price difference is a great low cost FX lens. Everyone needs to know that it suffers from a structural flaw that effects most if not eventually all. One of the internal optics separates and exposes the cement causing a haze that effects contrast. I had my problematic optic replaced with one that will not separate and it is like new again. Just remember you will have to add in this repair cost on top of the lens purchase. I would not use the 35-70 with the haze. The 35mm F/2 D and the 50mm 1.8 G are also great choices. I have both and use them along with my higher end glass. Great review.

hi, i baught a d700 and the guy threw in a vr nikkor 24-120 lens. whats the lens worth ?

@gman922

5 жыл бұрын

$50

The 80-200mm and other AF-D lenses don't have nano coatings, and are generally prone to flaring and ghosting. That's why even though I love AF-D build quality, I can't stand them.

Why not the 35 1.8?

@osterh4se123

10 жыл бұрын

its DX format, doenst work on full frame d700

@paranoia1337

10 жыл бұрын

Well no: there is a FX 35 1.8, too.

@sportagus3

10 жыл бұрын

paranoia1337 He's trying to stay under a grand

@nikonstar3341

10 жыл бұрын

paranoia1337 the fx version of the 35mm f1.8G is about 500-600 bucks usd and its obvious to go for the 35mm f2d since its much cheaper.

@IliaBasso

10 жыл бұрын

he doesn't consider the 35mm because two years ago (at the moment of the video) this lens didn't exist!!! quote NIkonstar the 35mm f2 is not too bad instead the 1.8 is smaller and it works on film...in my opinion is more versatile

f/3.5? That's actually pretty slow for a prime lens

So these are all FX lenses?

The list on the this website mentions a non D lens, so it must exists, I think: photosynthesis[dot]co[dot]nz, under serial numbers. But in general, would a non D be much less in image quality, focussing, etc?

uping the iso to compensate for no stabilization is a poor choice to make.....need to stay at or under 70mm with NO stabilization.....f3.5 is not acceptable, need constant f2.8.....

Hey, pretty old video xD But i was wondering, the 28-200mm nikkor is a fx lense? When searching it up i only find dx refence.

WHAT ABOUT THE 70-210 f4 ??? CHEAP AND GREAT QUALITY !!!! $180 BUCKS!!!

I like primes! I use a Nikkor 85mm F1.8G and Tamron 35mm F1.4. for indoors and black/white stuff, I like to use a Zeiss 85mm F1.4. for a work lens! picking up a Nikkor 85mm F1.8G is not a bad move :)

You can say that again! Cheap lenses just suck. Their softness and CA will be quite noticeable with a full frame sensor.

stopped watching at the 28-200

I compared my new 24-70 f2.8 and my 10 year old Micro nikkor 60mm I set the 24-70 to about 60mm. Result: what a difference. The photos taken with my new 24-70mm lens are so much sharper in combination with me D800 than the photos take with my 60mm lens although I always thought the micro nikkor was a bloody good lens. So, you can make a mistake getting a cheaper lens when it comes to the D800.