The Nikon Nikkor AF-D 20-35mm f/2.8 is a fantastic lens on full frame digital bodies, a lens that I've used for several decades through the pro SLR to DSLR era. The AF-D 300mm f/4 ED is a great lens on film and digital, although it doesn't quite match the F/2.8 version. I still use the 20-35mm professionally on a DSLR body and it is my favourite wide angle zoom of all time. At the top of my list is the incredible AF-D 200mm F/4 ED Micro, which is super sharp and even better on full frame digital D800/D850 than it was on my old F5. The greatest thing about the older AF-D range with 'crinkle exterior finish' was their outstanding build quality. The 20-35mm was also one of the last lenses to use special polished glass, before it became too expensive to 'sadly' produce them, and was replaced by cheap polished plastic optics and construction in later models.
Thanks for the comment. I really do love my 20-35 (and that entire era of lenses in general). I've not owned one but that 200 f4 Micro does seems like an amazing lens. Thanks again.
Great nikkor collection... I do also love the 60mm in the cropped sensor bodies, a very useful lens! As you said not just for macro! It works great for portraits, also for product photography, and of course for macro.
Thanks for watching. It is really a great little lens and yes... I just love using it on the D300S (despite the fact that body is getting kinda long in the tooth now). The lens is perfect for the crop format.
People think new lenses are better, It depends on the lens, but these Af AfD were made to meet the highest standards and the glass is top quality. As an example, The 17-35 AFS 2.8D was basically forgotten when the 14-24 2.8G was released. Everybody changed lens as apparently the newer was sharper and better, yet Nikon still produced it till last year. I own a 2022 copy. Nikon is being selling it for 2.000 euros, actually more expensive than the newer 14-24. Why is this, is Nikon stupid, are people idiots? No, it's just a great lens that still holds its place. It's not about time but rather about quality glass . That's what happens with all those in the video. The 300 f4 AF has an amazing saturation I hardly ever see in modern stuff.
I'm glad somebody else gets it. I hear people say "lens technology has improved so much in the last 20 years" so often and I just scratch my head. Maybe autofocus technology or metering technology has improved but all lenses are still just made up of glass (or plastic) elements in groups. Heck, one of the most famous pictures of all time (National Geographic Afghan Girl) was taken in the 1980's with an Nikkor Ai-S 105mm f2.5. That's ancient lens technology by comparison but it is insanely sharp, even by "today's standards".
I have a Nikon 24mm 2.8 af, a new Yongnuo af 35mm f2, 55mm 2.8 Ai micro Nikkor for flower photography and a 300mm f4 afs for bird photography. The Yongnuo 35 is so light, its great for vacations on my old tough Nikon D300s. I like the old Canon style look of it, especially with the Nikon hb-47 lens hood on it. Cool. And not a zoom in sight.
D stands for distance. D-type lenses have an extra contact that can send the focal distance to the camera. There's a lot of debate on whether or not this makes any "real" difference in your photos, but that's what it means.
It gives the camera the information of the distance, in normal situations you won't need it, just only when you take a picture with flash it will use this distance information to calculate the power in the automatic flash mode. Apart from that the D version and de non D version lens are pretty much the same.
