I bought an F-70 back when i was in high school and got the run of the mill lenses to go with it (AF 28-80 f/3.3-4.5D and AF 80-200 f/4.5-5.6D). I have decided that now may be the time to start looking into upgrading my lenses (prior to my upgrading to an F-100). I also have the SB-28 speedlight.

I have been reading all sorts of reviews of lenses, considering prices (I am now a university student) and have been trying to compile a list. So far I have ordered the AF 50mm f/1.8D (new) (which incidentally is supposed to be a fabulous lens for half of the price of its f/1.4D brother).

I want to move into wide angle ideally *good* zoom (pining over AF-S 17-35) but could do fixed (ideally less than or equal to 24mm). My 80-200 will last me a little longer I think (any opposing takes on this?) but I am looking for some good lenses for portraiture.

Does anybody have any suggestions on any lense acquisitions I might consider? I would like to stick with nikkor.

Many thanks for all those who can give me their two cents worth!

Rob

-- Rob Ewart (9re@qlink.queensu.ca), March 07, 2002

Answers

Hi Rob,

The "modern trend" for 35mm lenses is to cover the whole range from 20mm to 200mm with two or three zooms. Professionals or devout amateurs often do this with the f/2.8 zooms, where the "zoom compromise" is small.

If you were to get the AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8 and the AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 then, together with your 50mm lens plugging the gap, you would have a wonderful system ... at a cost of some $3000!

There are two, considerably cheaper, options to the 17-35mm. One is its predecessor, the AF-D 20-35mm f/2.8. This is only available second-hand, so you would save a lot of money, and some weight, at the cost of 3mm on the ultrawide end of the zoom. The other option is the current AF-D 18-45mm f/3.5-4.5. This is mid-range zoom, intermediate in optical quality and price between the f/2.8 zooms and the consumer zoom that you have.

The alternative to the AF-S 80-200mm would one of the AF 80-200mm f/2.8 zooms which preceded it. The latest of these, the AF-D, is still available new, but, by buying second-hand, you can save yourself a lot of money at the cost of the latest and fastest AF.

The only drawback to this lens is its weight. The above mentioned professionals and devout amateurs just accept this. See what you think. If it's too heavy for you, then the mid-range AF-D 70-300mm f/4-5.6 ED would be an alternative.

The zooms won't really do for nature closeups. The best first lens for that is the AF-D Micro 105mm f/2.8. On the F70 and the F100 (but not the F80) its manual-focus predecessor the AI-S Micro 105mm f/2.8 would be an alternative -- autofocus doesn't help closeups much.

Later,

Dr Owl

-- John Owlett (owl@postmaster.co.uk), March 07, 2002.

Hi Rob.

First of all I am from the "darkside" - Canon user. I think my experience may help (or just confuse). When you get your 50mm do some direct comparison test shots with your 28-80 preferably on Kodachrome or Velvia. Upon close inspection I think you will be amazed at the superiority of the 50mm in colour and resolution! If I am not wrong then you may want to consider the alternative of supplementing your current zooms with relatively inexpensive fixed focal length lenses from Nikon. I know the current trend is to go to fast 2.8 zooms, but since you already have two zooms that will do well for general photos and those spontaneous shots then consider zeroing in on your preferred focal lengths with fixed lenses. In my case when I was using an 80-200mm I quickly realized that I was really using it as a 200mm only. Monitor which zoom focal length you use the most and consider "specializing" in that/those lengths. Alternatively, see if you do want to go beyond the range of the zooms you have. The 24mm you mention although likely better in performance than your wide to moderate zoom won't provide much difference in angle of field to your 28-80 at 28. So, you might even consider going wider to Nikon's 20mm or 18mm. I also highly recommend the used marketplace for these types of lenses. I have a Canon 17mm lens so please note that the use of such a wide lens though giving incredibly impressive photos ONLY in the right situations also is used incredibly few times! (I will never sell it though and have never regretted buying it!) Okay, that is too much of my story, you will have to evaluate your own photographic needs and the needs of your pocketbook to determine YOUR path to better photography! Best of luck! John

-- John Crowe (jenandjohn@sprint.ca), March 09, 2002.