wide-to-short tele zoom choice?

desmobob

Senior Member
I like prime lenses, but I also like to keep a "trinity" of zooms on hand for convenience. I'm retired and on a tight budget so my trinity is not the fast and expensive trio, but budget alternatives. My current zooms are the AF Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.4-4.5 D, the AF Nikkor 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 D, and an older push-pull version of the AF 80-200mm f/2.8 D.

I'm pretty happy with the 18-35 f/3.5-4.5 and I love the 80-200 f/2.8 (except for the weight!), but the 28-85 f/3.5-4.5 just seems lackluster. It's looking like I might soon have about $1K max to spend on upgrading the 28-85. I can't afford the fast Nikkor zooms in that kind of range, the slower Nikkors don't have reviews much better than my 28-85, and I can't seem to pick out a third-party stand-out, either.

Is there a excellent bang-for-the-buck lens in this 24-70 or so range or should I look for a used specimen of one of the fast Nikkor zooms? I love the optical quality of the fast Nikkors, but I'm starting to consider weight as an important factor. Maybe I should just be satisfied with the 28-85 I already have...

Thoughts?

Edit to add:
I just noticed the difference in reviews of the 24-85 AF-S vs. the 24-85 AF-D. Maybe the AF-S is the one I might try...
 
Last edited:

desmobob

Senior Member

I really love the reviews, but at 35 ounces, I don't know if I'd want to carry it much...

Another lens I forgot to mention is the AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 VR. Many reviewers complain about distortion, but otherwise, it seems to be a versatile lens (and 1.5 lbs. vs. the 2.2 lbs. of the Tokina).

The Tokina does look to be a top performer, though!
 

desmobob

Senior Member
Since these zooms are more or less my "walking around lenses," I think I've decided that convenience and weight are large factors in my choice.

At the moment, I'm thinking I'll replace my old AF 18-35mm D with the much better AF-S 18-35mm G and replace the AF 28-85mm D with the AF-S 24-85mm D VR. This will put me a little over budget but will be a significant upgrade to two of my frequently-used lenses.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Another lens I forgot to mention is the AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 VR. Many reviewers complain about distortion, but otherwise, it seems to be a versatile lens (and 1.5 lbs. vs. the 2.2 lbs. of the Tokina).

The 24-120mm f/4 VR you mentioned is an excellent all around lens. My wife and I both use them a lot.

I too have the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 VR lens and find it to be amazing. In the past I was using an older Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 (no VR) that was light although its bokeh left a lot to be desired (onion skin type of circles). The 24-120mm is about the same size and weight, but the advantage is its VR and creamier bokeh. I use Camera RAW to set the lens profile of my NEF. That really helps take care of any distortion. However, if you shoot really close to your subject, most lenses will show distortion if the subject is close to the lens. No issues with distortion unless I intentionally shoot to include it.

When shooting groups of people, regardless of the lens used, if you are using a wide angle lens and the people are very close to the sides of your frame in horizontal images (or close to the top/bottom in vertical shots), you will usually see distortion (stretching of body parts) no matter what lens is used. It's a characteristic of wide angle lenses. ;)
 

TwistedThrottle

Senior Member
I have the 24-120 f4 and its used most often. I also have the old school 35-70 f2.8 push pull that pairs nicely with my 80-200 f2.8 push pull. If I know i need super sharp pics in low light, I use the 35-70, otherwise the convenience of having 24-120 in one lens at f4 outweighs the stop of light lost. FWIW, I find that I use the 35-70 on a D7500 more than on the D800.
 

desmobob

Senior Member
I decided to favor light weight and purchased an AF-S 24-85mm f/4-5.6G ED VR. I know it doesn't have the greatest reviews, but it is an improvement over the lens it replaced and it is lightweight and economical.

I got chance to use it at a get-together this week and I was pleased with the results. Here's a friend and one of his grandchildren, shot wide-open with the lens at 65mm:

_Lock12a.jpg

The image is a horizontal crop from a vertical shot and it had enough quality to hold up. The bokeh seems reasonably smooth and pleasant.

I also replaced my old AF 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D with an AF-S 18-35mm f/4-5.6G ED. That lens is also a step up from the one I used previously. With an AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED along with those two, I'm finally content with three decent, lighweight and affordable lenses that I can carry comfortably and cover my casual shooting needs from 18mm to 300mm. I wouldn't feel too constrained if I just carried any one of them by itself.
 
Last edited:

Dangerspouse

Senior Member
Very nice, that shot looks great! Glad you finally have a trio that meets your needs. Personal requirements are so important. What good is having a "better" piece of equipment if it's inconvenient to use? Best of luck and many happy clicks with the new lenses!
 

desmobob

Senior Member
Very nice, that shot looks great! Glad you finally have a trio that meets your needs. Personal requirements are so important. What good is having a "better" piece of equipment if it's inconvenient to use? Best of luck and many happy clicks with the new lenses!

Thanks, Dangerspouse.

I learned the value of light weight and convenience when I bought my AF Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D. The images it makes are wonderful and I immediately appreciated the lens. But it is so heavy I sometimes shy away from carrying it. I tend to only reach for it when I want to get the best image quality I can. The much lighter, smaller 70-300mm goes in my bag for casual use.

Some of these small and lightweight lenses might not give the same IQ as their bigger brothers, but I think it's sort of that deal where you 80% of the performance at 50% of the weight (and cost). The speed difference used to be an issue until my D750 and its sensor made that a lot less of a factor.

Yes; I do enjoy having some top-of-the-line Nikkors, but those fast zooms are big, heavy and expensive. I'm only a third of the way toward finally acquiring a "holy trinity" but, in the mean time, I have my "handy trinity" of zooms and some very nice primes to keep me happy.
 
Top