Looking for a cheap Nikon telephoto lens

[CptObvious]

FWIW, if I do B&H or Adorama, I'd physically go to the store and try it out before I bought, and for that reason I've normally avoided KEH. (KEH's website is also miserable) I was never able to find those lenses on the KEH site, but for about $50, I'm definitely going to get the Tamron or Sigma 70-300 from them. Quick question, which one would you recommend? I like being able to take manual control of focusing, and the fact that I need to flip a switch before focusing on the Tamron 17-50 annoys me. I also wonder if one of those bunch has noticably better IQ than the others.

The Tamron is the better of the two (better IQ and stabilization), and does have full-time manual override. However, it isn't exactly cheap compared to your original standards. Tamron recently raised the prices on all of their lenses so you're looking at shelling out $450 (minus a $50 rebate). It's also significantly bigger and heavier than your other two lenses. I owned this lens for a while but ended up selling it because I wanted a smaller telephoto.

 

[maniac5999]

The Nikon 70-210 AF (not AF-D) is a really sharp lens. Ken Rockwell ran up the price of the AF-D version with his positive review, but the non "D" version sells used for under $100. Push/pull zoom, good AF speed on the D200. You won't find this sharpness in other lenses in this price range.

The 28-85 AF is also really sharp (sharper than my Tamron 17-50) and works great on the D200. I used these two zooms a lot on my D200 and had about $150 in the pair.

JR

I'm having some trouble finding the Nikon 70-210, do you mean this one: http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20426059.html

The Tamron is the better of the two (better IQ and stabilization), and does have full-time manual override. However, it isn't exactly cheap compared to your original standards. Tamron recently raised the prices on all of their lenses so you're looking at shelling out $450 (minus a $50 rebate). It's also significantly bigger and heavier than your other two lenses. I owned this lens for a while but ended up selling it because I wanted a smaller telephoto.

I hate to be obvious CptObvious :biggrin:, but are you sure you're talking about the same lenses that we are? We're talking about this: http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Non-Mfg-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NA09009043636N?r=FE
and this: http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Autofocus-Non-Mfg-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NA09999028319J?r=FE

 

[CptObvious]

Sorry my mistake I was thinking of the newer VC version

 

[maniac5999]

well, between those two, which do you think is better? If you think the Sigma's better, do you think it's better enough to offset the 40% higher price?

 

[fralexandr]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fralexandr/6209244244/sizes/l/in/set-72157627687834033/
picture taken with Av: f/8, 1/200s, again that's not a crop
here's an example of purple fringing
for me, it happens in ~5-15% of shooting conditions, usually when it's bright out or with lots of reflections
note the "purpling" bordering the calipers (also noticeable on the reflections)
if you use photoshop, and are proficient in it, purple fringing shouldn't be too big of a deal
otherwise, i personally think it's worth it (i tried fixing a few things with gimp using some youtube tutorials, and i suck at it/need more experience T.T)

 

[maniac5999]

Hey, I didn't buy yet, and I just got to thinking, old manual focus stuff is normally dirt cheap. Would I be better off buying one of those? It looks like I get much wider aperture for my buck with MF stuff, am I losing out on IQ or something?

I can get a Vivitar 70-210 f2.8-4 for $ 33: http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Manual-Focus-Non-Mfg-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NK099991256010?r=FE

 

[fralexandr]

nope, for the most part AF usually doubles the cost of a lens :\
often they have more metal parts which usually means they're heavier

old mf lenses are great when on a budget or when AF isn't important

 

[maniac5999]

nope, for the most part AF usually doubles the cost of a lens :\
often they have more metal parts which usually means they're heavier

old mf lenses are great when on a budget or when AF isn't important

Cool. I have plenty of practice focusing, so I'm good there. Quick question, it says "loose" I assume that means that the focus creeps when you hold it straight up or down. Do you think that I should be concerned by that? Also, does focusing normally cause creep, or am I good there?

I know I'm asking about an ancient off-off brand lens, but man, 70-210 f2.8 is just sexy. Somehow, I always end up with the same solution with my photography-- Eff technology(VR), I've just got better optics and faster glass

 

[iGas]

Hey, I didn't buy yet, and I just got to thinking, old manual focus stuff is normally dirt cheap. Would I be better off buying one of those? It looks like I get much wider aperture for my buck with MF stuff, am I losing out on IQ or something?

I can get a Vivitar 70-210 f2.8-4 for $ 33: http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Manual-Focus-Non-Mfg-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-NK099991256010?r=FE

I had a Vivitar Series 1 70-200mm (version 3 with "A" setting) that was a great lens as well as the Samyang 18-28mm for my old Canon AE-1, AV-1 & F-1 cameras.

Both lenses are cheap third party lenses rivals OEM lens manufactures at center but slightly softer in the corner with a bit higher light fall off (which isn't a big concern IMHO). However, both lenses produced a bit more flares and distortion than OEM lenses (flares can be control by lens hood, and distortions can be corrected with today software).

If I recalled correctly the Vivitar 70-200mm produced sharper image as well as better colour than my old Canon 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM lens.

 

[maniac5999]

I had a Vivitar Series 1 70-200mm (version 3 with "A" setting) that was a great lens as well as the Samyang 18-28mm for my old Canon AE-1, AV-1 & F-1 cameras.

Both lenses are cheap third party lenses rivals OEM lens manufactures at center but slightly softer in the corner with a bit higher light fall off (which isn't a big concern IMHO). However, both lenses produced a bit more flares and distortion than OEM lenses (flares can be control by lens hood, and distortions can be corrected with today software).

If I recalled correctly the Vivitar 70-200mm produced sharper image as well as better colour than my old Canon 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM lens.

Was this with film? Remember, I'm going to be using this with a DX sensor (D200) so I'm only going to be using the middle 2/3 of the lens.

Also, does anyone know what size front cap it takes? I need to buy both caps to go with it (and probably an extra rear cap as well)

 

[iGas]

Was this with film? Remember, I'm going to be using this with a DX sensor (D200) so I'm only going to be using the middle 2/3 of the lens.

Also, does anyone know what size front cap it takes? I need to buy both caps to go with it (and probably an extra rear cap as well)

Yes, it was back in film days. The link I provided in the above post indicated that it can be 58mm, 62mm, or 67mm cap, pending version.

 

[maniac5999]

Yes, it was back in film days. The link I provided in the above post indicated that it can be 58mm, 62mm, or 67mm cap, pending version.

Scouring the report at KEH, it looks like the (58) means a 58mm filter size, indicating version 4 or 5. God, their website sucks. What do you think, still a steal for $33 with the note that it's loose? (+$10 shipping--I can pick up B&H and Adorama lenses, but I have to pay tax)

 

[iGas]

Scouring the report at KEH, it looks like the (58) means a 58mm filter size, indicating version 4 or 5. God, their website sucks. What do you think, still a steal for $33 with the note that it's loose? (+$10 shipping--I can pick up B&H and Adorama lenses, but I have to pay tax)

Version 4-5 aren't as sharp as version 1-3, but I wouldn't hesitate picking up any lens for $33. IMHO, an plastic OEM lens cap/hood often cost many times more than $33.

 

[maniac5999]

Version 4-5 aren't as sharp as version 1-3, but I wouldn't hesitate picking up any lens for $33. IMHO, an plastic OEM lens cap/hood often cost many times more than $33.

Thankfully I didn't buy, because it looks like Adorama just got a Version 1 and a version 2 in stock:
http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20428362.html
http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20477772.html
Quick question, the D200 needs AI or later lenses, right? because the version 1 is listed as non-Ai, but in better condition.

 

[fralexandr]

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm
that seems like a handy chart

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm
has descriptions of what that means

based on the chart non ai lenses don't work (with an exception of non AI lenses converted to AI)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm#aid

 

[maniac5999]

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm
that seems like a handy chart

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm
has descriptions of what that means

based on the chart non ai lenses don't work (with an exception of non AI lenses converted to AI)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm#aid

I thought so. I just wanted a quick confirmation. Rockwell has a guy who does conversions, but it looks like it's about $45 per lens with shipping. if it looks OK I'm going to take the one listed as G when I look at it on Sunday

 

[maniac5999]

It was hazy as anything :-( I guess I'm going to buy from KEH.

 

[fralexandr]

Hah, I don't get why adorama considers marred glass anything higher than fair.

 

[maniac5999]

So, I'm still hunting. Two new options:
Sigma 75-200 f3.5 AF $120
http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20489807.html

Tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6 $60
http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20440557.html

The Sigma seems nice and fast (and has a limited audience due to it's age) There seem to be some complaints about AF, but they seem (I hope) to only be coming form Pentax users. It is at the very top end of what I want to spend, however.

The Tamron's a bunch slower, but it would give me a nice bit of overlap with my current 17-50 f2.8, while the Sigma would leave me with a 25mm gap. The tamron's also as fast on the wide end as the Sigma (but is probably a fair bit slower by 75mm) What do you guys think?

 

[SHahsmerdis]

Ive got this with a combo deal, but its a pretty amazing telephoto lens for 250 bucks.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200mm...7467415&sr=8-1

you probably can find it for 100-150 if you go bit of hunting.

I use it to take pictures of the moon at its great! Sample shot coming up in a sec!