I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of all of the lenses you mentioned that I have had direct experience with. I've never used the 14-24 f2.8, nor the 200-400 f4. But I have enjoyed the others. I particularly like the value for money of the AF-D lenses. I think my 35mm f2 AF-D is probably my most often used lens. The super-inexpensive 24mm f2.8 AF-D does double duty for under $200 as my FX general wide lens, or as a 36mm equivalent on my D7000 DX body. The old 20-35mm f2.8 AF-D worked great for real estate interiors but I ended up using it almost exclusively at 20mm so I sold it, got a 20mm f2.8 AF-D, and pocketed the difference. I can also pocket the 20mm lens. For a normal lens, I shoot the same 50mm f1.4 AF lens as you do and like it very much. In the portrait lens category, I happen to own the 135mm f2.8 AI-S lens which is great, but would like to add that if one cannot find one at a good price, there is also an f3.5 version for about half the price that is also very good. I'm a bit surprised you didn't mention the iconic 105mm f2.5 AI or AI-S manual focus lens. It is very hard to go wrong with as well. In an autofocus lens, I find myself using the 85mm f1.8 AF-D quite a bit for informal portraits. I like it on both my FX and DX bodies. I can confirm that the 28-105 f3.5-4.5 AF-D is an excellent standard zoom, normally available here in the U.S. for $100 or less. It has a very useful Macro feature if you are someone who only occasionally does close-up work. The implementation of that feature takes some getting used to, but once you learn it, it is great. Even smaller is the 28-70 f3.5-4.5 AF-D, which is a neat little lens which sells here for about $75 US in like new condition. Speaking of Macro, the 60mm f2.8 AF-D is a great lens on FX or DX. One lens you didn't mention is the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 VR AF-S zoom lens. It seems to have a lot of distortion uncorrected, but not really noticeably more than the 24-120 f4 I tried out recently after watching your video on that lens. It doesn't quite have the telephoto range of the 24-120, but it is super cheap and plentiful on the used market here. I decided to stick with it rather than upgrade to the 24-120 f4. I just noticed that it is now the only Nikon lens I own that has VR. In the telephoto zoom category, the 70-210 f4 AF lens, only made for less than 2 years, gets my vote. This constant aperture lens compared so well to my 80-200 f2.8 ED 2-ring version that I sold the larger lens and haven't really missed it for the things I do. The size and weight of the 70-210 f4 is really convenient, construction is good, and price on my last copy, bought spotless from Japan was $125 US. The old 200mm f4 AI manual focus lens also does a good job for the $50 I paid for it, although its minimum focus distance is a bit long. I've read all over the internet about how these old Nikon lenses are obsolete. To hear some people tell it, you may as well be trying to shoot pictures through the bottom of a Coke bottle. I'm happy to hear the opinion of an experienced professional shooter like you who says otherwise. Very useful video. Cheers!
Very many thanks for taking the time to help fill in some of the thinner areas of the video! :-) The idea that neither the invention of AF nor VR directly improved the optical quality of Nikon lenses doesn't seem to be widely appreciated. Some of the best optical designs were achieved many decades ago in MF lenses. I guess it's not really in Nikon's interests to broadcast this message though..! :-)
A couple of my favorites : Nikkor Ai-s 200mm F4 - Exceptionally sharp even wide open. Is very compact for a 200mm and can be had for under $100 all day. Nikkor 105mm 2.5 - This lens is beyond sublime. You NEED to have it! Any and all of it's variants are great.
I carry 2 lenses, Nikon 24mm f2. 8 af and a 75 to 150mm f3.5 Series E which I use on my Nikon D300s. These two lenses give 35mm and 105 to 200mm approximately on the crop sensor camera. My other film NIKONS are F75, FE, and Nikkormat ft2. I also have a cheap as chips but great, Yongnuo 35mm af F2, a micro Nikkor 55mm 2.8, a 50mm f2 and my favourite 50mm non ai 1.4 which stays on my wonderful Brick all black Ft2 with its wonderful handling and superb focusing. I love Nikon.
Oh yesss, there are so many good lenses in there. I always get strange looks when I show my lenses but I own 80% of the lenses in this video and I think they are the cream of the crop in terms of 35mm lenses, period.
In The early 2000s a friend was upgrading to the early Nikon dslrs and sold me his film bodies and a few old lenses. I was making big improvements in my photography when buying and processing the film became too expensive and too much of a chore. So I quit shooting. Recently I had a heart attack and realized I have to change a few habits. I figured having a hobby might help, so I bought an old Nikon D300. I have only two lenses for it and was wondering which way I should go to fill out my shooting needs. This is the content I was looking for. Thank you.
@@jklenses8611 Oh, I have the AF Nikkor 28-85 3.5-4.5 d series with the screw autofocus, AF-S Nikkor 50 1.8G. My little brother bought me the Nikon DX AF-P Nikkor 70-300 4.5-6.3GED for Christmas but I can’t get the last one to work and understand it’s only compatible with Nikon’s cheaper camera bodies. I see some 70-210 zooms for around $100 on EBay - that’ll probably be my next buy. I’ll be fully covered at most distances I’d like to shoot. Then I plan to fill out my collection with manual focus primes in the 24-200 range for better quality. I’m keeping my eye out for deals on eBay but your reviews have been really helpful. Thank you!
@@johntravena119 In the 24-200 range the obvious gems are the 24mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4or1.8, 85mm f1.4or1.8 , 135mm f2.8 and 180mm f2.8 (ED) lenses which still offer some of the best quality possible on the FX format at very low prices compared to AF lenses… 😊
I have the 300mm f/4 afs. I purchased it when the new pf came out and had a choice and chose the afs. The image quality of the 300 afs is phenomenal and use it for live music video all the time . It renders people so “round” As you speak I also of the 400 f/3.5 I use it for outdoor live music videography and photography. Also it’s rendering of people and it’s bokeh is phenomenal. My next lens I’ll probably get is the 180 f/2.8 afs . I want people to look natural and have that 3D look and great roundness to them . We take our live music videos and work to give them a filmic movie looking experience. We want them engaging and to feel like you’d see and feel “I’m your head” at a live music show than an “in your seat” experience We have found Nikon cameras and lenses give us this over other brands .
@@jklenses8611 I'm British so the accent barely registers to my ears, but your reviews are quite simply the best out there. I know you've got a life and stuff, but if you could see your way to churning out just one or two more a year then I know a lot of people would be extremely grateful :P
Thanks-a-million for this review! I am a photographer that use many of what you’ve listed here, particularly the AIS and D-Series lenses, I’ve used and compared them with newer lenses and find it extremely hard to find better quality in some of the newer lenses. I’m new to your channel as I type this, but will be checking it out to see what I’ve missed. Thanks again!
The 105mm f/2.8 micro ai mount is a very good lens. It can double up as a portrait lens. You might be able to find a good deal in the second hand market
Not shouting at all ... went straight to ebay and got myself into a last 1 minute remaining Bid for 35 f2 AF-D and got the pancake for a nice price. Being a big fan of 50mm this will add nicely to my prime collection. Thank you.
Excellent channel! One nitpick: I'd actually choose the f/1.8 over the f/1.4 for the 50mm, just because the 1.8 has even less distortion than the 1.4 and it's just insanely sharp on my D850 stopped down. And, omg, I own the 135mm DC, and it's insanely good, truly the best and most fun piece of glass I've ever touched. And the 14-24, epic! Always in my camera. I had a 24-120 that came with my D850 kit and regret a lot selling it.
Nice review video! I love my D series lenses I bought for my F5 body! I still use and rely on them with my D810 body as well! I've saved a boat load of money on glass.
Nice summary, thanks. Personal favourites are all AFD lenses, the 80-200 f2.8, though heavy, is the closest i have come to prime lens sharpness on a zoom. And for macro results, the 105 f2.8. Absolutely spectacular. The 50mm F1.4 AFd doesn't disappoint though not at it's best wide open. Like the 28mm F2.8 AFd. I sold this lens and i am now regretting that decision.
Finding myself back here after a few years thanks to RU-vid's algorithm, and recently back with Nikon in the Z system, I'd like to give a huge shout-out to the 28mm f2 Ai/Ai-S. I've owned this lens for a relatively short while now but it may have been the best manual focus lens I've used in terms of image quality, ease and joy of use aside from maybe my Zeiss 135 3.5 Sonnar (also from the same era). Something special about it, and I'm really enjoying it for environmental portraits and that special combination of wide angle perspective and smooth bokeh.
Those 70s and 80s Nikkors are superb lenses - I've never used the 28mm f/2, but nearly all of them are very good to excellent. My fav is the 105mm f/2.5 pre-AI (converted), it's got a magic look that's hard to get with modern lenses - however good they may be technically.
About fresnel lenses, I have tested them on a D850 and they perform exceptionally well. The freznel ridges are too small to affect image "resolution" and the only hint they're being used is through bokeh which has a very slightly frizzy inner structure - easily corrected out. In fact, most manufacturers will turn to freznnel in the future as nano scale resin lithography becomes a more efficient (and potentially cheaper) way to bend light without colour aberrations. Those who don't will simply be left behind.
Excellent video. I'm on the cusp of getting an FX camera (to complement my D500) and my two widest lenses (the excellent 12-24mm f/4 and 35mm f/1.8) are DX. You may have helped me make my decision on great 35mm f/2 AF-D 👍
My favourite lens is a pre-AI 105mm f/2.5 from 1973 - sharpness wide open is incredible, even on 24mp Z6 sensor, and beautiful bokeh, colours, microcontrast...available for £100-200 if you can find one. Built like a tank, solid metal, but still small and lightweight. Stunning glass, even by the best modern standards. AI and AIS versions just as nice, but a bit more money.
I have the 105mm f2.5 AiS lens that I discovered at thrift store for $25. I now only shoot Ai and AiS lenses on my D750; 20mm, 28mm, 60mm, 105mm (this lens), 135mm, 200mm, and 300mm. The 105mm is my always go to lens. Unfortunately my eye-sight is going, so I think I will need to go to auto-focus lenses. A downer, because focusing the image on a prime lens makes me revert back to 1971 and my first REAL camera, a Nikkormat with a MF 50mm lens (stolen). I LOVE old Nikon glass.
@@markconkling4223 have you tried a mirrorless body with focus-peaking? it makes life a lot easier! Nice collection you got there - I've only got the 105 and a 1985 50mm pancake. I used to have a 35mm f/2 as well, but it seems to have disappeared, and I never loved it anyway - it was really soft wide open.
200-500 f/5.6 is great indeed. It is still quite heavy. It's a more than decent performer on my D7100, which is actually a harsher lens critic than my D800E and 850, due to its higher pixel density. On DX, the equivalent of 750mm really comes in handy sometimes. One warning about this lens, is that if you are going to use it handheld, which is possible, don't remove the tripod mount. There are a couple of metal pins that will be exposed if you do, and it actually makes the thing less comfortable to operate. Also beware the electronic iris control, which doesn't work on many older cameras. Another FX lens worth noting, is the 70-200 f/4 VR. It's almost sharper than the 2.8 version in my opinion (I have both), but weighs about half as much. I got mine used and all beat up for about $400, but it really doesn't disappoint. It's also a non-extending zoom, which means there should be no dust issues in bad environments. Completely agree on the 24-120 f/4 VR. This is my everyday walk-around lens if I take the D850 somewhere without a specific reason. It is perfectly sharp on that body, though it is heavy despite a mostly plastic exterior. Avoid the 28-300 VR. I'm not going to go as far as to call it garbage, but it is a disappointment. Might work well on a D6xx or D700, but its lack of sharpness is noticeable on D8x0. I bought this as a package deal (thought the lens would be good to take on vacation) with my D800E, traded it for something else less than a year later. Not worth even the bundled price (came out to something like $450-500).
Late to the party but just wanted to agree with you about many of these choices (esp 70-200) and second your mention of 180 f2.8 ais ed which is fantastic and the 300 f2.8 afs which is easily the sharpest lens I have ever owned. One of my favourites which didn’t get a mention is the old 17-35 f2.8 afs - mine has seen a lot of use and the motor now squeaks but the range seems perfect to me.
Thanks! :-) By the way, I would be tempted to get your squeaky AF-S motor seen to/replaced as the supply of these AF-S/SWM motors for lenses from this era is starting to decline, I believe...
a wonderful vid. thank you for the effort and the sharing. the several AF-D lenses you have a fondness for (i share the thought with the 60mm micro!) suggests you will not be getting a nikon z mirrorless body. i will now spend the rest of my coffee break looking up your other vids to further learn from your insights. thumbs up.
The limiting factor in my photography is my (limited) skill level. Has the mirror inside my camera body been holding me back for years? Of course not!! :-)
about the Afs replacement of the 60mm micro!! The AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED hit the shelves in around 2008. A different design and most people prefer the AFD version.
Thanks for the great list. I agree with most of the lenses you selected. I have a problem with your choice of the 14-24mm f/2.8 as the only selection for wide and ultra-wide lenses. The 14-24mm is a great lens. However, the 14-24 is a G lens. G lenses do not have an aperture ring. Since I shoot with older Nikon bodies (F2 and F4) that need an aperture ring for correct exposures, I cannot use G lenses on my cameras. I need the 14mm f/2.8, 18mm f/3.5, and 24mm f/2 Nikkor prime lenses that have an aperture ring.
For the lovers of landscape photography the 20mm f1.8 afs can be found on the second market at more than half the price of the z mount equivalent. It s sharp at full aperture in the center and very sharp everywhere for landscapes at f8. Knowing that the ftz adaptor doesn’t make it longer than the z one (all z lenses are longueur than their equivalent in F mount as the sensor is a lot more in the front of the camera on hybrids than on dslr) it s à far better value for owners of z full frame cameras.
@@jklenses8611 Do let me know if you want to sell any prime AI/AI-S Nikkors you have at 20mm! I agree with everything you say about them - those and the AF-D's (I have the 85mm 1.8D and boy does that lens rock on both FX and DX bodies!).
Something I feel needs to be said about the 300mm f3 Afs, is that the tripod collar is not stable at slow shutter speeds. The company Kirk makes one that is.
What about the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D as a standard zoom if you don’t need the wider focal length of the 28-70 f/2.8D ED AF-S or the 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S then this little lens will give you pretty much the same image quality as the other two and it’s built better than them too! You can also pick up a good working example at a reasonable price now and let’s not forget that the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D was Nikon’s top of the line standard zoom for over a decade from 1992 - 2007 even though the 28-70mm f/2.8D ED AF-S was released in 1999 the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D was being produced alongside it until the the 24-70mm f/2.8G ED IF-ED was released in 2007....the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8D was and still is that good! 👍
Well you forgot to mention that in the 70-210mm range of zoom lens made by Nikon over the years the sharpest zoom lens prior to the latest E FL version was the 80-200mm AF-D ED f2.8 zoom lens rendering prime lens quality in a zoom agin as you said due to it's low element count this is sharper than the 70-200mm f2.8 AF-S Vr 1 & 2 that followed not counting of course the AF-S version of the 80-200mm f2.8 zoom which has the same image quality but was plagued with early design silent wave motor & was prone to fail without replacement parts to fix it anymore but optically as good as the other versions including the push/pull version of that lens.
Great Choices - Unfortunately I already have all the lenses you recommend - I'd only disagree with the 2 standard zooms chosen and perhaps the 50mm lenses - The 200-500mm f5.6 is a great lens and I usually chose it over my 200-400mm because of the weight....
I own 24 f/2.8, 35 f/2, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8 and 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 AF-D, so fond of their sizes and weights and perform pretty well even with a D850. the 28-105mm is a little soft at 105mm but impressive between 28 and 85, the 24mm is really good for landscapes from f/4 to f/11 and the 50mm is awesome from f/2.8 and I enjoy the wide-open soft contrast. I also own a 55mm and a 180mm AI-S, but I think about a 180 f/2.8D to replace the AI-S and a 105 f/2D to replace the 85 1.8D, it's pretty good even wide-open but I prefer the 105 length more (I owned a 105 f/2.5 AI, miss the field ^^).
So far, I have the 50mm 1.4G and just bought the 24-120mm 4.0G VR for my Nikon system. My plan is to get the 14-24mm 2.8G, the 24-35mm 2.0 Art, the Zeiss 100mm 2.0 Macro and maybe the 200-400mm 4.0G VR if I find one that's very inexpensive.
That 28-105 3.5-4.5 AF-D really is excellent, was my first lens on the D600 that I have since parted with purely due to everyday weight and pocketability reasons - images taken with that lens really are fantastic, and aside from a hair of purple fringing I've never found anything to complain about. If you own a Nikon FX body and don't want to shill out for the 24-70/28-70 2.8s or 24-120 F4, this is a great lens to have around as your normal zoom. And hey, you can even save yourself carrying an 85 or 105 around on a day out, assuming you don't see yourself missing the ultra wide apertures. For the 100€ I paid for that lens in very good condition used, I couldn't have been happier during my time spent using it.
I agree! I keep using it in place of the 24-70mm f2.8 (which has some purple fringing too!) and can only rarely tell any difference in the final images.
I recently got rid of all my heavy 2.8 lenses as I got too old to humph them about.All I use now on my D800e is the 60mm macro 2.8D the 24-120mm and the 70-200mm f4 the latter surprised me in quality reckoning about 90% behind the 2.8 your favourite.
I agree! I’m often carrying gear quite a long way on two legs or two wheels and am a big fan of lenses which can save weight over the f2.8s. My personal favourite at the moment is the 28-105 f3.5-4.5 AF-D which is almost a pocket-sized lens but easily delivers 90% the quality of the f2.8 24-70… 😊
Nikon made a 60mm f/2.8G AF-S micro-nikkor so people with the D3x00 / D5x00 DSLRs could use autofocus. [10:30] As a bonus, the AF-S will also autofocus using the FTZ / FTZII adapter with the Z-mount cameras.
In terms of build, use and image quality the 200-400/4 is on a different planet - as reflected in price, even if you are buying second hand. if you are shooting a lot in this range and need high quality results, then the extra money (and size and weight!) for the 200-400/4 will be worth it... :hope this helps... :-)
@@jklenses8611 The price where I'm at seems to hover around $700.00 for one in good condition. I've owned one in the past and it's a lens I regret selling. As you pointed out, even without the Defocus Control it would still a fantastic lens. The DC controls spherical aberrations, and does not move the depth of field. A mistake I see all the time on other sites. Love your reviews and have owned all the lens you covered at one point or another except for the 200-400 f/4 lens. If I need more reach than the 300 I use a 500 f/4 lens which in my eye has far better image quality than the zoom.
Hugely helpful,thank you. Alas, uploading at 360p does not remotely do justice to your images. Sort of defeats the purpose of a channel devoted to lens quality IMHO.
Unpopular opinion: I think the AI-S 85 1.4 is the best of the bunch for its increadible out of focus areas, punchy yet natural colors and beautiful skin tones (especially with a D3)
@@jklenses8611 You should definitely try one out if you stumble across it. They can be quite pricey but from time to time you can get them for about 400€. I think its a much better lens than the AF-S 85 1.4.
The 35-105 D lens is a hidden gem not only is it tack sharp it in cludes marco down to I believe 1:1.2 so not too shabby, this lens is on any Body FX or DX that I own 50% of the the time :)
Obviously i am a bit late to comment, however i do love my 300mm f4 ED. I would never sell this lens its just superb...The 28-105 has been a favourite of mine for quite a few years now, i use the close focus facility quite a lot, also the 24-120 V2 is a good all rounder...
Along side the 35mm f/2 D, you might want to try the 28mm f/2.8 AI-s if you want that little extra width. It also focuses very close - .7 ft. Not quite macro, but still very close.
Used many lenses in the past from canon & Nikon dx and FX : personal favourite is 135 2.8 nikor . Very lightweight and the rendering is absolutely magical . The 85 1.4 D is nice but does not have the WOW factor. Excellent video as always
I agree! Two beautiful lenses if you are working in the short-telephoto range. I always struggle to see how the hugely-expensive 85mm f1.4 AF-S gives better images over the AF-D version. All the reviews tell me that it does but in practice the AF-D 85mm f1.4 is hard to beat… 😊
Lot of great earlier AF-D lenses. Should also make a guide like this but best cheap lenses. Like the 28-105 and 50 1.8D are. The rest are too expensives for real people.
I own the 14-24 2.8 but rarely use it as I find 24mm wide enough with my 24-120 f/4 I keep wondering about buying primes but my D780 has great low light quality so not sure I'd swap lenes over for the 1.8 of a 50mm prime, I've also looked at the 200-500 f/5.6 but again I don't think i'd use it very much, not in to wildlife shooting and not sure what other use it would be. I am planning a trip to Japan and really need to work out what are my best lens choices to take
Great review. I actually own this lens and find it invaluable for travel photography. It stays on my D750 most of the time. It is tack sharp at f8, it's a keeper.
Great reviews as always! I have a few of the lenses mentioned, especially the D lenses. I was wondering how the 24-85 3.5G fares? I have gotten very shrpr pics from it.
I’m sorry but I can’t agree on 85 and 105 you mention. The 85 1.4 AFS g is so disappointing as soon as your subject is a little bit far, never making the focus correctly and it has non négligeable chromatic aberrations and bokeh fringing, which the 105 DC is even more plenty of. Apart this, yes they produce stunning images when used properly and when taking in consideration their flaws. My selection today would be : 28mm 1.4 AFS E 58mm 1.4 AFS G (but has a lot of bokeh fringing and I would recommend using it for B&W ) 105mm 1.4 AFS E 200mm f/2 80-200mm AFS a little soft bust it has such a smooth and pleasing blurry background that all the 70-200 cannot reproduce.
Hi there, I own several of the lenses review or variations on them ie f1.8 rather than f1.4 50 and 85mm the 70-200mm f2.8 vrii , 24-120mm f4 VR and the afs 300mm f4 d ed also the af 24mm f2.8 d i use to have th af 60mm f2.8 d micro but sold it to help fund the upgrade of my old D7100 to a D810 (but I want one back) but the 12-24 f2.8 is not a option because of the price even second hand so I opted for a tokina 16-28mm f2.8 for 1/2 the price. But the question is, the 20mm prime have you any experience of the older f2.8 D over the newer f1.8 G certainty there's a big difference in price and the extra stop but is it worth difference, even both lenses second hand its it's in and around £300 of a different. What is your thoughts or recommendations. Thanks Gary.
Hi. I've had the 20mm f2.8 AF-D lens for years and have absolutely no complaints whatsoever. It's very small and light and delivers the excellent quality you'd expect from a Nikon prime lens. AF speed is v fast as it is such a small lens so cannot think of any reason to pay for AF-S. Similarly, I've never found myself needing an extra stop of speed and hardly ever shoot at f2.8 anyway. If I was in the market for this focal length (and didn't have the 14-24 f2.8) I'd just buy a secondhand f2.8 AF-D version a nd get on wit taking pictures :-)
@@jklenses8611 that's great thanks, CEX had one for £200 but I missed out but they tend to come up a couple of times a year. Personally I like CEX on line they have a no quibble returns policy and 2 year warranty and they have do get the occasional gem some junk as well like the af 20mm 2.8 non d and looking £185, the front element is all scuffed. I'm in no big hurry I just would add one to the collection. Thanks again.
Great video. I'm curious as to why you mentioned specifically the 1.4 versions of the 50mm lenses - is it just the difference in aperture that made you not recommend the 1.8 D or G, or is it other characteristics of the lenses which aren't as good?
Just don't recommend stuff I haven't used! :-) I'd be surprised if there's many situations where the f1.8 versions are a noticeable distance behind the f1.4s in optical quality and they would obviously win in a value-for-money contest...
DO you use a tripod when you use the 180mm F2.8 AF-D? Without image stabilization, I can see camera shake throwing off fine detail sharpness. Also, is there any recommendation for any of these FX lenses that work well on a APS-C cropped sensor?
I know what you mean about the 180/2.8 - it’s very much at the limit of what I can reliably handhold. If light is good, allowing fast shutter speeds, then I definitely use it handheld but otherwise a tripod is a good plan - depending on the subject. I’m often shooting things which move quickly so have to push up ISO to keep a fast shutter speed, making VR not really relevant. Those shooting largely static subjects would make this call differently. However, the 180/2.8 with AF-S and VR added would probably ensure that nobody ever buys the 200/2 ever again! 😊 All the lenses in this review have excellent performance in the centre of the FX frame and would therefore give superb results on a DX sensor body. The only issue would be whether they give an effective focal length which is useful to you… I’ve often used the 70-200/2.8 on DX as it gives a very useful 100-300mm effective focal length range. As always, it depends on what type of subjects you’re shooting… 😊
JKLenses, do you ever give troubleshooting to people? I have a Nikon 200-400mm 1:4 G II ED that I cannot get to focus, have attached it to my D5 and my D800 and neither will focus it. I had sent it to Nikon for same thing last year but said they could find anything, but did clean lens. I cannot figure out what I may have done to make it stop again. It is an intermittent problem, so thinking it may be a setting or something easy to fix, but getting perplexed.
Hi! This sounds very odd, assuming that the D5 and D800 focus other lenses OK. It sounds as though Nikon need to see the lens with the camera body together. Assuming all the obvious settings are correct, there’s no reason other than a fault with the lens or a tolerance issue between lens and body (which is unlikely if they worked in the past). What were you doing with them just before they stopped working again? I would return lens and body again, partly because so doing strengthens your case for asking for a replacement lens in the future if this keeps happening…
Have only used it occasionally but good build quality and excellent optical quality. For some applications, just about the perfect focal length range. If you shoot at these focal lengths a lot then I think you'll love it... :-)
Problem with the 28-70/2.8 is auto-focus. AF fails after a period of noise and sluggishness. Nikon won’t repair these any more. Careful on eBay. Flawed AF copies abound.
Do NOT buy a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR1 - Nikon don't stock the parts any more, and the AF is starting to die on most of them now...very bad investment. Mine won't even manual focus.
