Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D Outstanding Optics!
Written: May 13 '02 (Updated Jul 31 '02)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: All metal body construction for durability, razor sharp images, handling
Cons: Rotating front barrel
The Bottom Line: A magnificent lens, optically and mechanically. I would recommend it to anyone looking for these qualities in a lens. It is also the best buy for the money.
|
|
|
| paulphoto's Full Review: Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8D Lens |
INTRODUCTION
My first Nikon zoom lens covering this 35-70mm focal range was the Nikon 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6D. As my photography skills improved, I wanted to have a lens with constant aperture that also offers the finest optical quality. The Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D zoom was on my list, along with other third party lenses (particularly the Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8, the new Tokina 28-80mm f/2.8, and Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX) that I wanted to get. The 35-70mm f/2.8 had received such controversial reviews that I was skeptical about getting it. Among these zooms, Nikon is the oldest. I thought it had all the negative attributes, such as its push/pull zooming style, rotating front barrel, short focal range, and its 62mm filter size (where all my other zooms take 77mm). I also ruled out the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX based on its optical performance (compared to Tokina) and its unattractive physical attribute. I did not want the Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 slightly due to its small variable aperture, and because its brother 28-80mm f/2.8 is more appealing in terms of cosmetics and focal range that perfectly matches my Nikon 80-200mm zoom. So in Fall 2000, I got the Tokina 28-80mm f/2.8 AT-X PRO. I thought I was a happy person, until recently I decided to try the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D to satisfy my curiosity. This incident completely changed my views about this 35-70mm f/2.8 zoom. In the following paragraphs, I would like to discuss how I think the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D is truly the finest zoom lens in this focal range producing top class picture definition.
DESIGN, HANDLING & PERFORMANCE
The Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8D has been in the Nikon line for a very long time, since the beginning of the autofocus era. The first 35-70mm f/2.8 was introduced in 1987, and was only updated to incorporate the "D" technology in 1992 for Nikon N90, the first camera with a 3D Matrix Metering system. The fact that it has never been modified proves that its optical and mechanical design was perfect from the outset. If I were smart, I would have figured this out from the start and would not have wasted money and time on the Tokina. But we live and learn.
Cosmetically, the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D zoom is quite compact when collapsed, at 3.7 inches long. It is very well built with good balance. Its body is all metal construction for durability. This means that the lens is heavy, and it is. Its zooming operation is via a push/pull. Pushing the lens all the way out to set the focal length at the 35mm range. Pulling it back in will set the focal length at 70mm. In between these two extremes you can fine-tune the focal length to your desire. The push/pull zoom barrel is very smooth and well damped. I can shoot pointing straight down or straight up without worrying about zoom creep. Though this problem might occur when the lens is old and worn. The focusing ring is wide enough for a good secure grip with excellent texture, and very smooth in operation. It takes about a quarter turn to focus from 2 feet to infinity. This lens does not have an M/A (MF/AF) switch. So if you need to change from MF to AF mode or vice versa, you need to set the focus mode selector on the camera body. Inconvenience? May be, may be not; and I’m not complaining. However, the front barrel rotates during focusing. This can prove inconvenient when a circular polarizing filter is used.
At 35mm, the lens has a macro capability, but will lose autofocus operation. In this mode, it can focus on close subject to about 3.5 inch from the front barrel. This feature offers quite a good creative, unconventional, yet interesting perspective for close-ups, in contrast to the normal close-up perspective of the 105mm or the 200mm focal lengths. A close-up photograph of a flower produced by either a 105mm or 200mm lens makes it appear you are looking at it from a far distance. With the 35mm at macro range, it makes you feel like you are riding on the flower or looking at it up close nose to nose. With its front barrel accepting a filter thread of 62mm, macro capability can achieve a 1:1 ratio with the Nikon diopter 6T.
The lens balances very well with F100, F4 (w/ MB-20) and N90s. However, it is a bit awkward with F5, especially for handholding, because of the extended, bulky body at the bottom of F5. In terms of balance and performance, this lens appears to be a perfect match with F100. The reason being that the F100 has the fastest AF operation (compared to N90s and F4); and with its five AF sensors, focusing on a selected subject is quick, and the lens responses quite well. This brings to the next topic regarding the lens' AF response. The autofocus operation is reasonably fast and quiet (with a slight hiss sound) with F100 and F5. With F4, it is moderately fast but a bit loud.
When it comes to image quality, the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D really shines. It consistently produces razor sharp images throughout its focal range, and at all apertures. This lens achieves its optimum performance between f/5.6 and f/8 for complete center to corner sharpness. This is indeed an amazing lens! Exposure appears to be very accurate at all apertures, except some light falloff at f/2.8. It has good control of flare when its matched lens hood HB-1 is used. However, when the bright sun is near the angle of view, flare can become pronounced. Surprisingly, it handles quite well in backlit situations particularly at wider apertures. This is possibly due to the fact that it has only seven blades, and thus at smaller f/stops you can really see ghosting. At macro setting or even with diopter 5T or 6T, the lens also produces outstanding images, further adding to its ability of being such a versatile lens.
In terms of optical distortions, it shows slight barreling at 35mm and minimal pincushion at 70mm. So, from a perfectionist's point of view, this lens may have some limitation in architectural photography at the wide angle. I mainly use it for landscape and portraiture, and therefore have nothing to complain about.
COMPARISON: Tokina & Nikon
I have owned Tokina AT-X 280 PRO for almost 2 years, and thought I had the best optics until I finally tried the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D. When I first saw my prints (photographs of kids during Easter egg hunt) I could not believe my eyes. In the previous year I had used my Tokina to shoot the same kids picking Easter eggs, using the very same color print film—Fuji Reala. I took the two photographs and just starred at them with amazement at the Nikon's 35-70mm f/2.8D optics: its sharpness, color and contrast. This incidence stirred up my desire to set out my adventure to really test and compare the optical performance of these two lenses, by using slides to maintain consistency. I shot various subjects in various lighting conditions side by side with these two lenses in various apertures and focal lengths in the 35-70mm range. And, in conclusion, the result was the same just as I first saw the photograph of the Easter egg hunt produced by the Nikon lens. From that moment, all my original negative attitudes towards the 35-70mm f/2.8D zoom disappeared altogether. I was very surprised, glad but sad at the same time, because in the process I felt very stupid to have recognized the Nikon 35-70mm optical quality in such a very late stage. After all, this lens came out a very long time ago. This is like when you are in a group of people listening to a joke. Every body, but you, laughed at the joke. And then a couple of days, or weeks, or months later, you came back laughing telling people how funny that joke was, when all had already forgotten what the joke was about.
In terms of image quality, Nikon outperforms Tokina at almost every aperture and focal lengths, particularly at wide open. Of course, it is very difficult to see the differences in image quality between f/5.6 and f/11, since these two lenses perform at their best. However, at f/2.8, Tokina produces softer images with some kind of a halo effect in backlit situations. The sharpness of Nikon at f/2.8 is very evident; this is clearly the advantage that I favor. Nikon has a better contrast, but in terms of color, the two lenses are very compatible. However, Tokina suffers more flare than Nikon, both in normal and backlit situations.
In terms of handling, Tokina is much better than Nikon. But that is logical, for a lens that came out more than a decade after the 35-70mm f/2.8D. Distortion is also better corrected in Tokina, particularly at 35mm.
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION
Compared to its current competing models, such as the Sigma 28-70mm, Tokina 28-80mm, or its bigger brother AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D ED-IF, the 35-70mm f/2.8D does lack the wide angle of 28mm focal length. I believe this is among the many reasons why most people (including myself initially) did not like this lens (based on its focal range and physical appearance). Some even claim that you could get a much cheaper 50mm f/1.8 lens and “zoom” it with your feet. I truly believe that these people never took the time to actually examine the relative distance and perspective covered by a 35mm focal length compared to the 50mm one. With a simple speculation, you can see that in order to achieve coverage produced by a 35mm focal length, you must move backward a bit with a 50mm lens. Here you achieve the coverage, but you fail to maintain the perspective (not to mention that some unwanted elements in the foreground come into the frame). Photographing people using a 50mm f/1.8 lens and "zoom" it with your feet to cover 35-70mm is fine; I do this most of the time too. But for landscape photography this does not always work, or even for some creative environmental portrait. Furthermore, the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D is almost five times heavier than the 50mm f/1.8 (at 5.5 ounces), meaning that the weight is very important to help reduce vibration during mirror flip to avoid picture blur. I have tested a handheld shot of my Nikon N6006 with 50mm f/1.8 and 35-70mm f/2.8. I could achieve a sharper image with 35-70mm f/2.8D even at shutter speed of 1/30 sec at 70mm compared to the 50mm f/1.8 at 1/60 sec. The 50mm f/1.8 is of course sharper than the 35-70mm f/2.8D, and also faster by 1 and 1/3 stops. But this sharpness can only be achieved with careful picture taking technique with faster shutter speeds or on a tripod. For handheld and at moderately low shutter speeds, the 35-70mm f/2.8D's weight no doubt helps achieve sharper images.
The performance of the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D is simply magnificent, optically and mechanically; I cannot stress hard enough. I have been using it for only about 7 months; and the more I use it, the more I appreciate it. At a price of about $600, this lens can be worth that much. I really don't think you can get a better optics that this one for such a price.
Currently, the 35-70mm f/2.8D is being sold along side with its bigger brother, the Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D ED-IF. Compared to the 35-70mm f/2.8D, the AF-S version is a dream lens. It has all the wonderful features that the 35-70mm f/2.8D lacks. These include the useful 28mm focal length, the rotating zooming style, the non-rotating front barrel that accepts the (most used) 77mm filter size, the superior balance (especially with F5) and handling. Most importantly, it incorporates the new Silent Wave Motor technology offering lightning AF response with an ultra-quiet operation including instant MF/AF override. And the list goes on. Perhaps, the AF-S can achieve better optics over the already superior optics of the 35-70mm f/2.8D, but I am not willing to dismiss the fact that you have to spend so much money (more than two times that of the price of 35-70mm f/2.8D) to get all these features.
I have had the chance to handle the AF-S 28-70mmf/2.8D ED-IF for a few months, but did not get the chance to actually compare its optical performance with the 35-70mm f/2.8D. However, I was impressed with its handling, though it appears to be a bit bulky, but balances very well with F5. I thought that based on the superior optical quality of the 35-70mm f/2.8D, the AF-S Nikkor can hardly improve that much. With the justification that the price of the AF-S version is at more than $1300, the Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8D is no doubt the best buy for the money, or for a budget buyer like myself. But if you have the money to spend on the AF-S, it is still the best and wise choice. I truly think these two zoom lenses are the finest ones made by Nikon; they are the best of the best. For me, I am more than satisfied with my Nikon 35-70mm, and I really don’t think you can get a better optics than this one for a fairly reasonable price.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.