| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
  | sent on 28 Dicembre 2023 Pros: Sharpness, contrast,color rendering, sturdy construction. Cons: Nothing Opinion: Amazing lens! It exceeded all expectations. I bought it for a ridiculously low price in perfect condition and I want to say that it is not only amazing for the price that one finds it to buy but I think it competes with much more expensive lenses. Sharpness, contrast and color rendering are its strong points. I already had the Nikon AF 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 which is also an excellent lens, despite all this I bought it even though I had read in an article by Ken Rockwell that between the two he considered the 28-85 sharper and I did not regret it at all for this purchase. I was more satisfied with the purchase of this particular lens.Recommended. |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
 | sent on 19 Giugno 2025 Pros: Compactness Cons: Yield at the edges on the shortest focal lengths. Opinion: On a well-known magazine in the 90s the test of this lens struck me, results that gave it above average in terms of yield, a lens reported as "not to be missed"... With this memory in mind I took it a short time ago hoping to have a nice quality compact all-rounder. The rendering is a bit soft, tested with D700, D750, S5 and D7200, it is not exciting, overall more than decent, good sharpness in the center, but at the edges the 28-80 D does better, at 28mm the 28-80 G is better on the whole frame, and this was not a very cheap lens at the time, perhaps I had higher expectations because of the aforementioned test. Going up in focal length the yield becomes more uniform, 50 and 70mm are already better but nothing special. It loses on all fronts compared to the 28-85 AF, I prefer the 28-80 D overall, and even the 35-70 3.3-4.5 in the end I find it more pleasant, not to mention the 35-80 D which is a bit dark but optically it is on another planet, Regarding the brightness the lens has a "transparency" higher than the others I own. At TA it is at least half an aperture brighter than all the other f3.5 zooms tested, brightness that remains constant at + 1/2 stop even when closing the diphragm (which still works correctly)... This "mistake" turns into shots that are always a little brighter than the other lenses. Slightly overexposing the negatives (such as slightly underexposing the dia) is a way to have photos a little more saturated and impactful, I think that this trick is the basis of the good reputation that this lens had in the past, but that to really evaluate the performance is only enough. |
 | sent on 20 Aprile 2024 Pros: Construction, sharpness, colors, price, size. Cons: For the price and age none. Opinion: Also a surprise is this old Nikon lens, as for the 35-80 f4-5.6D. Paid a trifle, found used in perfect condition, amazed me for the quality of the images returned, especially for the colors that even with Neutral setting on the camera are very vivid, good sharpness (for me more than enough) on D700, as well as the microcontrast. The construction is really good, much more solid than the new models of the same level, which are a triumph of plastic not even of great quality. Focus ring multiplied, as it should be, and not as it is often found, a ring that with 1/3 rotation goes from 50cm. ad infinitum. In short, a lens, which today if you find it used with little change gives you truly unexpected results... |
 | sent on 25 Maggio 2023 Pros: resistance, price Cons: Stiffness and play in the focal length variation dial Opinion: I align myself with the review that preceded me: slow without infamy and without praise but able to honor the most common needs; it is solid, aesthetically pleasing, returns a good feeling except for a certain rigidity and possible play in the focal length variation ring; Overall the value for money of this glass is more than good. My opinion makes use of an empirical comparison, partial and without any claim to scientific, of this lens at focal lengths 35 and 50, iso 200, on nikon D700 and D780, aperture 5.6 with the following optics: NIKKOR 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 D, 28-300 f/ 3.5-5.6 G ED VR, 28-200 f/3.5-5.6 ED G, 28-80 f/3.3-5.6 G, 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 D, 35-80 f/4-5.6 AF D, 35 f/2 AF-D, 50 f/1.8 AF-S G, 50 f/1.4 AF D, ZEISS ZE/ZF.2 Distagon 35mm f/2, ZENITH HELIOS 58 F/1.2, SIGMA 24-70 f/2.8 EX DG MACRO. I filmed with everyone the same scene strongly contrasted. I considered sharpness (also) at the edges, opening of the shadows and tightness to the highlights, color rendering. In this personal ranking at 35 mm win the 35 f / 2 and the very light 28/80 G, followed by the 28/80D and 35/80 D, also extremely compact and light, follows the massive sigma 24/70; The all-rounder 28/200 and 28/300 arrive last for the modest results at the edges (valid instead in the center). The result at 50 mm is more complex. Considering the D780, the tiny 35/80 achieves exceptional results, almost indistinguishable with the benchmark, namely the 50 f/1.4. Immediately behind are the two tiny 28/80 G and D and the large and heavy 28-300. The helios is a world apart: very sharp in the central area, it has no automatism and has a very particular blur, which you may like or not. With the D700 wins the 50 G f / 1.8, continues to do well in all parameters the 35-80, the sigma is slightly softer but holds the highlights well, the 28/70 D here in comment, the 28/80 D and G the 28/105 and even more pronounced the all-rounders tend to burn the highlights, but problem that I did not encounter with the D780. This 28-70 is in the middle. The 35-80 and 28-80 are featherweights of a few tens of euros of excellent optical yield (the 28-80 especially on the D780), not perceptibly dissimilar from the best fixed, which is shocking, given their multi-decade age, the non-existent cost and the negligible weight. There is a vague suspicion that the manufacturers are taking us by the bottoms, selling us unnecessary weight. The 28-70 here in comment still has a much more robust and consistent construction than the cheap one of the aforementioned microzooms, but the yield is lower than the focal lengths 35 and 50. I did not make comparisons to focal length 70. |
 | sent on 02 Marzo 2022 Pros: resistance Cons: none for the price range to which it belongs Opinion: quite versatile lens, not excellent but still able to meet the most common needs. The only thing that bothers me a bit but it should only be my case is that the bezel that varies the focal length is quite hard (probably due to the dirt accumulated over the years) for the rest fully meets the expectations |
 | sent on 06 Ottobre 2021 Pros: Total and absolute quality. Sharpness, colors, focus, lightness. Cons: Nothing to report. Opinion: Simply an exceptional lens . Out of fashion, outdated? Not at all. With little money you can buy a high-level optics that has nothing to envy to the current ones. It is also light and easy to handle, which is now rare, unless you use horrendous and junk plastics. It is definitely worth having it in your kit. |
|
| sent on 06 Ottobre 2021 Pros: Total and absolute quality. Sharpness, colors, focus, lightness. Cons: Nothing makes you report. Opinion: Simply an exceptional lens . Out of fashion, outdated? Not at all. With little money you can buy a high-level optics that has nothing to envy to the current ones. It is also light and easy to handle, which is now rare, unless you use horrendous and junk plastics. It is definitely worth having it in your kit. |
  | sent on 13 Maggio 2020 Pros: Af-D works on all my analog and D bodies, light, compact, fast and precise (of course there's better), plastic but durable, good overall yield Cons: a little washed out and with little contrast of its own in the final surrender compared to other my goals, but I do not know if it is a counter to 28mm and TA has a slight glossy/dreamlike effect but it can be interesting Opinion: was my first purchase, I had to choose a zoom quickly because the 60 micro on the d200 was too long and I was undecided, between him and the 28-105, read the opinions here on juza and those of kenR , I threw myself on this that I paid at the end 40 degrees, on the d200 was a little long and slowly I joined it with the 19-35 , but on film or D610 is a real all-rounder the mount and not the deadlift anymore, in fact not to use it usually I start already with another goal, as it is said in these cases does not excel in anything but is good for everything, it is not a macro but focuses very close, it is not a blade but nn knead, I do not have the lampshade , but it has a resistance to flares commendable the maximum gives it with two stop closing from TA but it is discreet even TA as long as it is not at the shorter focals generates a glossy effect that is not always said to have. the thing I noticed compared to the 70-210 and the 60 micro is the less "saturation" of colors and a lower contrast, if you do not like anything unsolvable with settings in the room or in PP. on the d610 it was necessary to make the fine AF adjustment, on the d200 no, fortunately since nn exists :-D |
 | sent on 12 Maggio 2020 Pros: Compact, light, no ghost and a few flares, little distortion at 28mm, minimum distance of maf reduced, excellent color yield, deriful price (for what it offers is given if you pay 100E, excellent sharpness on the whole frame closing by 1 stop (on Nikon D850 from 47 Mp!), a ta is quite sharp in the center and gradually decays to the edges (great for portraits) Cons: THEY DON'T DO IT ANYMORE!... The lens rotates during the maf (uncomfortable for circular polarizer). Opinion: If Nikon had simply updated this optics with a real aspheric lens (no hybrid - plastic glued to glass) and a few extra seals, you could have saved virtually every other zoom in this range of focals, maybe making an f2.8 only for those who just can't do without it (and they are few, compared to those who buy the 24-70 f2.8). I haven't been good with this zoom, taken used at 90E. I mounted it on the D850. He made me chapeau. It weighs 1/3 of the 24-70 f2.8 g and in my possession. And the yield is really beautiful. Moral: I'm going to sell the 24-70 f2.8. I do not make much of 1 stop less and 4mm less than the f2.8 (with Nikon D850 and Nikon D5 if shot at 12800 ISO and mold 20x30 is equal that if I had shot at 6400 ISO), while I am very pleased with the other qualities of this small wonder (made color, compactness, lightness). I'm only concerned about the tightness of the hybrid aspheric lens (glue between plastic and glass). Edit: Recently used "for challenge" for studio photos, with a really good rendering. The photos were perfect as outputs: crisp, consistent color yield, soft, progressive tonal passages. I can only reiterate the goodness of this lens. |
 | sent on 18 Dicembre 2019 Pros: cheap, discreetly sharp Cons: vignette, not particularly bright Opinion: bought this morning, I took some test shots, and I must say that I did not expect such a yield from a 60 euro optics. it is not particularly bright, but the sharpness is discreet, the price, I repeat, content, and anyway until I can take a 2.8 I will try to settle. the only flaw is the lack of the lightroom profile, resulting in vignettes that are difficult to correct in full |
 | sent on 13 Settembre 2019 Pros: Size, Weight, Price, Construction, Chromatic Yield, Flare Hold, Sharpness, Starry, Precision AF Cons: Given the price ... I would say none Opinion: I was looking for a handyman for my d700, I would have preferred to have a fixed f2.8 but both for a matter of cost and for a matter of clutter and weight I opted on this lens and it was a surprise, better than I expected! Specifically at TA it is already very sharp in the center with a bit of a coma at the corners (especially at 28mm, where it is softer and is noticeable barrel distortion) but just close by a stop and the lens shows a surprising sharpness all over the frame , in general the yield is fairly uniform at the same opening diaphragm over the entire focal excursion, good colors, contrast, excellent seal ingess compared to aberrations and flares, excellent starry 18-pointed (very defined on any excursion), construction definitely good (it seems assembled better than other af-d lenses like the 50 1.4D), focus not very fast but decidedly precise (a bit noisy but so are other lenses of the same series), ultimately as much as it definitely costs to have to kit. |
 | sent on 21 Marzo 2019 Pros: Light Robust and functional Cons: A little plasticous Opinion: A very balanced handyman optics, used on my analogue SLR (Nikon F80) performs well at all focal lengths without excelling, it is a great all make light and comfortable to carry around for trips (it is not so bright but this is good because it is small and light). On Digital does its job, I use it on my d300s for reportage and contextualized portraits and it's not bad, it has a good yield and closing from F 5.6 onwards is crisp. Excellent construction of the very robust zoom nuts that blocks the lens and does not allow involuntary hikes. To the feel from the plastic feel but in the end it is quite sturdy. |
 | sent on 02 Agosto 2018 Pros: Portability, lightness, compactness Cons: Nobody Opinion: I possess many lenses, but this 28 70 has accompanied me in many adventures. Excellent in all conditions. Maybe when there is little light it would be preferable to have a f2.8 but I prefer this lens because it never misses the focus. The lenses with larger openings need a complicated focusing system, while with this 28 70 I can also focus manually, using it on mirrorless systems. With the cost to which it is today, under the 100 euro specimens in good condition, it is spectacular. If you find it around I would highly recommend it. |
 | sent on 13 Luglio 2017 Pros: PORTABILITY, sharpness, construction, price, use with built-in flash Cons: I would have preferred a 24mm Opinion: Funnel of the Huge Nikkor 24-70 2.8 I bought in very good condition at € 40 this small lens for light outputs. I have to say that's just what I was looking for ... something portable, with a good excursion and excellent picture quality. Good construction, AF not integrated yet reliable even in the dark where you can use the built-in flash without having the unpleasant shadow. What to say highly recommended! |
 | sent on 30 Maggio 2017 Pros: Great color rendering (equal to my 24-85 vr) resistant to flare and ghosts. Sharpness, small size and weight. Cons: For me nobody. Opinion: I have rediscovered this (anonymous and small lens) from the time I shot with film, wonderful, light and yet robust; Overtakes the 24-85 vr, which in my opinion always remains a bit soft, even though it is in manual with the same parameters as the old lens. Mounted on the nikon d750 has a great yield, superior to kit 24.85, as already mentioned, so much to hinder me to sell it. The chromatic yield is similar if not identical and the lack of superfluous vr. In my opinion, a great travel goal, not in the eye, and guarantees great shots. Highly recommended, even because it can be found just over one hundred euros. |
 | sent on 16 Maggio 2017 Pros: Great color rendering, lightweight, cost-effective use. Cons: nobody Opinion: With the transition to the FX system I needed a "trip" lens that would allow a wide-angle excursion to the small tele. Considering that I have seen photos taken by Juzaphoto users, my choice has fallen on this lens after having Looked at nearby focals. I spent 140 euros and I think I've done a great deal. I think that compared to the more lucrative optics it performs terribly. I think that the photos taken will hardly get rid of it from my D750. |
 | sent on 20 Gennaio 2016 Pros: No to the flare and ghost, sharpness, compact, rugged, lightweight, today Value unparalleled ... Cons: Nikon old project, no vr ... Opinion: Fabulous ... From the first shots has proved its forza.Anche think is unsurpassed in black and white, sharp, contrasted, faithful colors, sharp as I never expected (on occasion hard to believe that it is a zoom given the similarity in yield to my fixed) .I have decided to look for him after reading many excellent reviews on the web: http: //www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/287035af.htm .......http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/240-nikkor-af-28-70mm-f35-45d-review--test-report...http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/AFNikkor/AF2870mm/index.htm and many new altre.Trovato at a bargain price, I'm enjoying it. A great discovery this dinosaur, which already promises to be irreplaceable companion avventure.Consigliatissimo for those with few euro does not want to sacrifice quality and functionality, and then for what it represents (From a height of 20 years), my vote is 10 |
 | sent on 17 Aprile 2015 Pros: low distortion, resistance against the light, sharpness af 5.6- f11, compact, rugged, lightweight, color fidelity, quality / price ratio Cons: "Haze" at the widest apertures Opinion: Personally gave me great satisfaction on film (especially b / n) .rnOttimi results also digitally despite being a old design. On D90 (already, ..purtroppo you lose the wide angle side) is clear (slight sharpening) both long and short to medium distances. It is not too contrasty. For the colors and tonal passages prefer it to the new zoom. Excellent resistance to flare and ghost.rnCostruttivamente simple, designed for general photography, does not have the specificity of professional goals (.. the price has 0 instead some less) and will not be the lens from blurred spectacular (but already af 5.6 and the right distances much can be done). rnCredo they are just to avoid the widest apertures. With little light better raise the ISO: holds better than more famous lenses (with the same sensor) ... but it is more of my impression. rnrn |
 | sent on 18 Gennaio 2015 Pros: Beautiful blurred (9lame), good resistance to flare and fights well the AC. Price flea. Weight | size. Lentuccio and noisy. Cons: Up to f5.6 it is too soft. Opinion: It's cheap and it's convenient to carry around. It 'a bit' noisy when focheggia and the front lens rotates with the motor, so you have to have the right precautions when using a CPL filter. It is not far enough at room temperature (3.5 to 4.5), but f5.6 unfolds decisively, and f8 onwards becomes a bomb, etched with lines and shapes and pasty (typical of Nikon D) and colors scream, vivid and warm. It can be used safely in the backlight: fears nothing. Some ghost (typical D) and a slowness that sometimes can make you lose a few shots. The bokeh character reminiscent of the first lens series brighter Q: chopped ice effect, very pleasant and relaxing. To go on the road (photo report) without worries for expensive photographic equipment and delicate, it is definitely ideal. The full size tends to saturate most of the colors and forms to knead. I do not think rivolva well on very dense sensors (over 16MP of APSC). |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
