DSLRUsers.com

Hi people

just wondering how sharp the 28-70mm f2.8 is at widest aperture

Plan to use it mostly at f2.8 through to f4 at 70mm

Birddog, Glamy and Heath I know you have this lens
Glamy i remember you once mentioned it was soft at f2.8?

I read what bjorn rosset had to say but still mystified, it's a expensive lens just want to make sure i have everybodys opinion on it before I commit selling one of kidneys, or dressing up in drag for the Pheonix bar riff raff every friday night.

Hi Wendellt
Yes it is soft @f2.8 with my Fuji S2, Glamy said it is much better if it is on the D2X @f2.8, it is expensive lens so I strongly suugest that you go to the mini meet ( or arrange with Mr Birddog ) to try it out on your D2X before making decision .

Regards
Spada

I already tested it out many times, but i just can't make a consensus
back then i didn't know how to use the lens properly or the camera to it's full potential so my results were irrelevant.

Lots of people say it's one of Nikons sharpest zoom lenses.

Wendell,
I am the same, did not use it properly in the first place, but on the D2X it is much sharper than on the D70 at 2.8. I tend to agree with Than that the difference is in the focus ability of the D2X. You can use mine for a week if you want (That is the one I use most!).
Cheers,
Gerard

wendellt,
You've tried it few times haven't you?

Glamy and spada didn't try it hard on the D2x, every camera body has difference characteristic, you can't ask & comparison the lens in between two difference bodies, it won't tell you anything.

Yes, it's sharp, it's worth to own that lens and have it permanent on your D2x body as you can see lot of Pro photographers or PJ use it on many events and occassions.

Again, it depends on your skills and techniques, not every top glass in any hand will sing.

Spada, retire your S2! grab a D2x and you'll see what I meant! you have top glasses in your possession but the S2 won't serve you well with all the gems which you have!

glamy wrote:Wendell,
I am the same, did not use it properly in the first place, but on the D2X it is much sharper than on the D70 at 2.8. I tend to agree with Than that the difference is in the focus ability of the D2X. You can use mine for a week if you want (That is the one I use most!).
Cheers,
Gerard

Thankyou for the kind offer, How can the D2x have any affect on it's focus, the lens is AF-S meaning that the lens focuses itself internally, the body has no involvement, maybe i am wrong about this, I am just so confussed because there is soo much opinion on this lens.

Birddog if you say it's sharp at f2.8 when usedin the right manner, that's good enough for me, o.k i am off to the hospital now to get my kidney removed.

wendellt wrote:

glamy wrote:Wendell,
I am the same, did not use it properly in the first place, but on the D2X it is much sharper than on the D70 at 2.8. I tend to agree with Than that the difference is in the focus ability of the D2X. You can use mine for a week if you want (That is the one I use most!).
Cheers,
Gerard

Thankyou for the kind offer, How can the D2x have any affect on it's focus, the lens is AF-S meaning that the lens focuses itself internally, the body has no involvement, maybe i am wrong about this, I am just so confussed because there is soo much opinion on this lens.

wendellt,
Trade your D2x for a D70s and you'll find it immediately!

Wendellt:
Look at these new threads from yeosca, he used the Tamron 28-75 for his works:
http://www.dslrusers.net/viewtopic.php?p=129736#129736

Or:
http://www.dslrusers.net/viewtopic.php?p=129733#129733

Or:
http://www.dslrusers.net/viewtopic.php?p=129731#129731

I loaned you a Tamron for couple weeks and you could not find the uses of it!

Birddog114 wrote:wendellt,
You've tried it few times haven't you?


Spada, retire your S2! grab a D2x and you'll see what I meant! you have top glasses in your possession but the S2 won't serve you well with all the gems which you have!

.

I want one but after I get out of the death sentence ( mortgage ), I only need one D2X to get out of that.This year I have to go holiday again so I have to make use of the old one.

Regards
spada

Wendell, the Tamron alternative should be considered if you find you can't live with 1 kidney. 90% as good as the Nikkor for 30% the price.

But there is definitely something about the Nikkor 28-70/2.8 that makes people like me wanna make sweet sweet love to it all day long if I ever got a hold of one.

wendellt wrote:

glamy wrote:Wendell,
I am the same, did not use it properly in the first place, but on the D2X it is much sharper than on the D70 at 2.8. I tend to agree with Than that the difference is in the focus ability of the D2X. You can use mine for a week if you want (That is the one I use most!).
Cheers,
Gerard

Thankyou for the kind offer, How can the D2x have any affect on it's focus, the lens is AF-S meaning that the lens focuses itself internally, the body has no involvement, maybe i am wrong about this, I am just so confussed because there is soo much opinion on this lens.

Sorry Wendell but you are wrong - the body, and its focussing system, is paramount in the lens being able to focus correctly. The advanced CAM2000 system would ensure a better result than the D70. I have noticed that I get much better results from the kit lens on the D2Hs than I do from the D70

sirhc55 wrote:
Sorry Wendell but you are wrong - the body, and its focussing system, is paramount in the lens being able to focus correctly. The advanced CAM2000 system would ensure a better result than the D70. I have noticed that I get much better results from the kit lens on the D2Hs than I do from the D70

Not to mention differences within different production runs of lenses - these have been around for a while - so a old secondhand vs a new may have a pretty different result...

I have the lens . Flare is the main issue - not sharpness imo

lejazzcat wrote:
Not to mention differences within different production runs of lenses - these have been around for a while - so a old secondhand vs a new may have a pretty different result...

I have the lens . Flare is the main issue - not sharpness imo

lejazzcat,
Especially with these Pro lenses. You should buy new rather than buy a used unit, used unit may be came from difference rejected factors or has been repaired or has problem previously or did not look after by previously owners.

Perhaps you got the bad sample and you're using it on the D70.

I do not have any issues of this lens on my D2x and same as others.

Chris and Onyx
thanks for the proper guidance, I am sure the Nikon 28-70mm will perform all night long on the D2X, when used to it's full potenial and handled skillfully.

I have been very keen on this lens for avery long time i have seen some great results from it and have been convinced by the sheer number of pro photographers who use this lens for their purposes.

Onyx I will not consider the tamron, i used it once and i don't like it's feel it's also slow not AF-S, no disrespect to Spada who uses it. If i want it i just have to get serious and save some money to get it, if i buy quality it wil lminimize the risk of getting into a buying loop.

If any one has a great tact sharp photo taken at f2.8 on this lens coudl they be so kind to post a 100% crop of it.

Wendell, Brorn Rorslett only rates the lens as a five and he spends days and days testing lenses, so that should be food for thought. That is five out of five.

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_ ... AFS28-70ED

Other way is buy it, not happy then ditch it! simple !!!

Birddog114 wrote:lejazzcat,
Especially with these Pro lenses. You should buy new rather than buy a used unit, used unit may be came from difference rejected factors or has been repaired or has problem previously or did not look after by previously owners.

Perhaps you got the bad sample and you're using it on the D70.

I do not have any issues of this lens on my D2x and same as others.

Yep- good advice BD - PJs/pros flog their gear so buying from these guys is rarely going to be a happy scenario.
But its the savings that suck us in.

I bought it, thinking it was going to be better than sex ( im getting old... ) but I still havent worked out how to get its bloody clothes off!

I continue to use it as my walk around lens...does everything i need( and probably more)

Really if you dont NEED it - dont buy it.

Dont think that this lens(or any other) will make you happy - its like a drug - as soon as you come down - youll need something else to bring back feeling- probably of that first ever high (and probably made on a crappy polaroid instamatic when you were a kid ! )

Its like a surgeon being obssessed by the sharpness of his scalpel, rather than the wellbeing of their patients (most nurses btw Godblessem')

I myself am over the whole lens lust thing. Ive been studying the workings of some great photogs and they hardly ever go on about gear.

Its the results that speak for themselves. There are no magic lenses that make you a great photog...

Anyhow- in these days with PS - your image doesnt even need to be perfect straight out of the camera,with whitebalance and sharpening, shadow/highlight adjustment...

Imagine guys, or do you still remember - what it 'was' like - in the good old film days?
Even when the colour was off (wrong film stock), focus was out (no AF) and them just guessing at exposure times (no lightmeter,no histogram or lcd display), how they still made some great images ??!

Garbage in - Garbage out im afraid.

wendellt wrote:If any one has a great tact sharp photo taken at f2.8 on this lens coudl they be so kind to post a 100% crop of it.

I thought the world of this lens in terms of sharpness at wide apertures. Must be a faulty memory cos I just reviewed some past pics taken with this lens and they're not exactly how I'd remembered the lens to be. Anyway, as requested, f/2.8 samples:

http://kayimages.com/images/2870a.jpg (359kb, dial up beware)

http://kayimages.com/images/2870b.jpg (163kb, gorgeous bokeh)

It gets MUCH better at f/4 and beyond.

Glen I read through Brorn Rorslett's reviews often,, as soon as he mentioned ghosting and flare I got a bit sus about the lens, becauae i like shooting into the sun, either way I still like the other strong points of the lens like fast autofocus and sharpness at widest aperture.

HEath mentioned to me once thta the 17-35mm takes a more interestign picture as wide angles do, I am all for interestinmg perspectives, so at the time I lost interest in the 28-70 and lusted for the 17-35, then i saw heaps of social photographers use the 17-55DX so i ditched the 17-35 for wanting the 17-55, then birddog said build quallity is questionable so back on the 17-35 then at fashion week brad hick and other nikon users were using the 28-70mm, I have seen brad hicks work in print does not look ultra sharp but the focal length is perfect for runway work and it focusses fast, therefore I am now back on track on tis lens.

I guess i am just trying to justify the cost to myself it equates to the cost of a return ticket to europe. Saying that i know i will be getting the lens one day.

leejazzcat, I know great gear doesn't necassaril make great images and i agree when i was stuck with my canon ixus 2MP pixel camera i was more creative with it than i am now with the D2X but i say if you have the great gear when you do take a good photograph it at least has the benefit of being shot with good equipment, and that's enough justification for me.

Chi thanks for posting those shots, they look soft but at 100% that is to be expected, there are so many factors that could have contributed to the softness so I still have faith in the ability of the lens at widest aperture.

it's pretty rare a zoom will be super sharp at wide open.

I've used 2 28-70's, each behaved identically. One was on an S2, one on a Kodak.

It is acceptable at f/2.8 but if you compare it to a prime in a similar length it's pretty average. At f/4 it's what I would call good, at f/5.6 it's outstanding.

On FF the edges are pretty good!

I have a gut feeling (not scientific!) that the 70-200 is better at f/2.8 at 70mm than the 28-70 is.

It's a good lens but if you really are bent on needing f/2.8 i'd recommend a prime. If you are more f/4'ish and smaller then grab it.