I've bought this lens last year. Macro is very good for my needs, colors are beautiful, handling is easy. Only objection is CA when it is full open in bright daylight, but stoping down is giving satisfaying results.😊
Got it because a tamron 28-70 gave up on me and the reach is very comfortable, sometimes you wish for a little bit more strech but its good enough that I'm very happy with it and it allows me for a very light carry with only a 50mm 1.8 for the occasional portrait and as soon as it gets dark
I have had this lens for a few years, plus twenty six other Nikon, Sigma and Canon L lenses of all specs ( I won't mention the Leitz nor the Zeiss Hasselblads ). This lens punches well above its weight. The ' Macro ' is more than usable, quite good in fact. Considering its performance, range and usability given its price, I would class it as a bargain.
I just found one on european ebay, a guy from Netherlands is selling it for €105, and i think i will get it since it is really in mint condition. It's a lovely zoom and even with all the negative sides and tradeoffs i think it's still a good investment and value for money. Thanks for the review!
This is absolutely what I needed to see and hear. I had been impressed by what I saw on Flickr from a D700 and 28-105mm combination, but obviously needed a more serious evaluation of the lens before I'd invest in them.
Hello again Frederik, I have owned and shot with this excellent lens for well over 10 years. I have always felt image quality to be excellent - especially when considering the purchase price. Your well done presentation provides me with the welcome reassurance that just makes me feel pleased with my "old" friend of a lens. I notice all to frequently complaints regarding lens quality / construction, slow AF etc. When I purchased this lens many years ago it personified - epitomized photographic "high tech" and I honestly feel this remains the case in 2021. Again, excellent video. All the best to you and yours, Terry
Thank you for your kind words Terry! Yes, this lens is a hidden gem in the Nikon lineup if you ask me - not perfect, but then again, who's perfect? But perfect for me as a light walkaround lens that yields excellent results.
@@frederikboving Hi Frederik - Just wanted to thank for your reply. They are always so greatly appreciated. Just another small, although hopeful, example of possible positive change when considering what we have experienced in society's current / rapidly declining civility. After all - all we really have is each other. Sorry, I just got a little carried away there. Anyway, in case we don't communicate before the end of the year, thanks again for your return correspondence and Kathy and I hope for an absolutely great upcoming holiday season for you and yours. Terry
After seeing positive reviews for the Nikon 24-85 3.5-4.5 VR, and deciding to look for one on Ebay, I kind of accidentally stumbled on this 28-105 for silly low money ($65). At that time, there weren't any thorough reviews of this apparently "forgotten" lens but I figured it was not much of a risk to try it, given the cost. I definitely have a soft spot for lenses that over-perform for their price point, and this is definitely one of those lenses. Truly a very versatile lens, as you say. Another very similar lens that can also easily be had for under $100 is the 35-135 mm f/3.5-4.5. It appears to be from the exact same time period regarding manufacture, and it also has a similar macro function. The biggest downside of this one is that it's built like a tank, meaning it's heavy. But if you want that little extra zoom reach, you'll find that the photos from this lens are really good!
Thank you Greg! "I definitely have a soft spot for lenses that over-perform for their price point, and this is definitely one of those lenses." - that is a really good way of wording the message that I try to get across. The 35-135 is noted. I enjoy the 28-105 for now, but GAS will soon come along... :-D
The 35-135 comes from a generation before (F4), it is the AF version of the MF 35-135 and rock solid metal, while the 28-105 comes from the "more plastic generation", but is still reasonable as a middle class standard zoom. The 28-105 is more versatile and compact, and it sits on my F4 and D3.
Hi Frederic. I came across the chance to get this lens in mint condition and bought it for a reasonable price just because of your recommendation. I married it to a D3 and it is absolutely great. But to my biggest surprise it has NO (close to zero) chromatic aberration and is (on D3) razor sharp. Colors are stunningly beautiful. I love to shoot it B&W as well because of its lovingly microcontrast. Of course, it is a perfect combination on both, D3 and D700. Great!!! I want to say „Thank you!“ for your video.
If it has almost no CA then you have certainly been lucky! My copy has so much of it that it's almost funny 😄- but great to learn that some copies does not have this issue 🤗👌
This lens is the SOP lens on my D750. My copy, from Japan via Ebay, is outstanding. With the 24-120 the kit isn't very handy at all. With the 28-105 its almost as unobtrusive as a rangefinder camera. Focus is quick, macro at your fingertips, long enough for intimacy indoors, wide enough to frame a smaller room. It's like shooting street 50 years ago with my FTb. I have never NOT been able to edit out the CA (Photoshop not LR) it occasionally displays. My copy was mfg circa 2002 and is in excellent mechanical condition. The zoom ring was a bit balky for the first 2 week to a month until the light grease it carries loosened up and now is as smooth as my other lenses.
Great review and insight into your own approach to lens acquisition, am relieved to hear it’s such a positive review as I’ve already ordered a copy so I just hope it’s a decent sample once it arrives :) The area I’ll be interested in is partly size in the hands as I tend to favour smaller lenses but the versatility is a major appeal so will see if not having to carry multiple smaller AIS primes offsets that (I like manual focussing and in fact I use a Sony body) Anyway, thanks for the review, good job!
Thank you Henry! What always strikes be about this lens is how light it is! And I keep thinking - it cannot be that light and good at the same time. But then I look at the images it produces, and I stand corrected. The only major issue is CA, but there are ways around that in LR. Best of luck with your copy!
I wish camera companies still made affordable lenses like this. Wide focal range, and decently bright as well, I think they were affordable even back when they were new (200-300$). And they're full-frame size! So what if there's not tack sharp or have a bit of chromatic aberration? Compare these Nikon and Canon lenses to CURRENT offerings. The 24-105 Canon kit lens on their full-frame mirrorless cameras has roughly the same focal range but it's WAY darker... f7.1 at 105mm rather than f4.5 here? That 1.33 stop dimmer! And a lot deeper depth of field. Sure, you got IS, which is useful for video, not that much for usual photography. And don't get me started on the 24-50 Nikon packs with its full-frame lineup, it's compact and that's it, atrociously narrow focal range and it's f 6.3 at 50mm! It doesn't even have IS.
I just grabbed one of these to maybe replace my 24-120mm f/4 because after nearly a year of owning that lens I still can't get used to the heft and weight of it on the D600, where it feels very unbalanced. And in general just find lighter and smaller lenses (and cameras) much nicer to use.. which is one of several reasons I won't let go of my D3300. But the extra stop of DR the full frame camera gives sometimes wins out. Perhaps the 28-105mm will hit an ergonomic sweet spot on the D600.
I recently picked up a used D700 in immaculate condition with low shutter count. I found a great condition Sigma 28-300 for under $100 and it's been an amazing lens so far and I've been able to enjoy my first foray into full frame without having to spend a ton of money....yet...lol.
Yes, if you are willing to buy used and accept that newer is not necessarily better, then you can get top gear on a budget! Sounds like you made some great deals!😃
Hi Sammy, and thank you for your kind words! The first test (lens sharpness at varying apertures) was shot using a Nikon D750. I think in future videos I will briefly present how I test, i.e. using a Nikon D750, a tripod, a flash in TTL mode, no ambient light, etc. But in general I use the Nikon D750 as my test workhorse, as the 24 MP allows me to zoom in a lot and still have details.
Got one of these for $40 back in early 2014 for my... Nikon D40. :D 1) The short manual focus throw is an absolute B*TCH to work around if your body can't drive the screw-type AF mechanism. Especially so since the rubberized part around the focus ring tends to disintegrate after all these years. (So yeah, build quality issues.) 2) Put on an FX body, it gets super blurry on the wide end at max aperture - you really need to step down to f8 or so to get any kind of sharpness out of it. (This is obviously less of an issue on DX) 3) The rubber reversible hood is quite hard to come by, so you will have to rely on your hand to shield it from flaring issues. That said, I think it's an absolute steal paired with a D7x00 sort of body. (Hell, I even enjoy it adapted to a Z5...)
Thank you for sharing Mjak! Sounds like you have a lot of experience with this lens! My main gripe with this lens is the CA when shooting into the sun. Absolutely horrible, but can vary a lot from copy to copy. All the best!
I bought this lens second hand on the internet. Unfortunately the left side of the photos were very unsharp, not just something you could see when zoom in to 300%, but really blurry.. The seller rejected to return the money so now it stands on my shelf and I regret everytime I see it.
Sorry to hear that! When I buy used on the internet, I deal with pro's. That way, I am sure I can return the goods if I am not happy with the purchase. I am not sponsored by mpb.com, but I do recommend them, just to mention one. When you buy from an amateur, you are not as well protected as you are when you buy from a pro - at least that is the legislation here in Denmark, and I would imagine it is the same in many other countries.
@@victorboucher675 yes it became an expensive experience. i would like to get it passed on to another photographer who is not so pernittengryn but i will not do it without telling the thruth.
I’m late to the party but curious. Did you sell your 35-70 and keep this lens? I have the 35-70 but have been considering replacing it with this lens because of the weight, the extra range and your sharpness test results. Did you keep both or sell one?
I've sold the 35-70. Technically it was a better lens but heavy as I don't know what! The 28-105 is super light and produces beautiful images. It has tons of CA so if you shoot in high contrast the lens is absolutely horrible but otherwise it is light and versatile without breaking the bank!
@@frederikboving Thanks for responding! Yes! I think I’m gonna go the same route, especially since both lenses share that macro function. The weight and bulk of the 35-70, especially mounted on the D700 is a bit much for long walks so it winds up staying home more and more. Will have to look out for the CA but it’ll probably get more use than my 35-70. Love your channel. Keep up the good work! I’ve learned a lot from watching the last year or so.
I was wondering, have you tried comparing it to the 24-120 f4? Have ever found the lack of VR a constraint? I'm looking for a good walk around lens. Thank you for the excellent review as always
Hi Anas, thank you for your kind words! My experience with lack of VR is that it is a factor to consider when shooting with long lenses (like 180 mm), but for 28-105 I manage fine without VR. I usually find a lamppost to lean the lens against or a fence to rest my elbow on, so that I minimize camera shake. I don't have the 24-120 lens unfortunately, but it seems like a good lens based on this review: photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-24-120mm-f4g-vr/4 - nobody's perfect, and this lens is no exception, but if you can live with the drawbacks as described in the review, then this could be the walk around lens you are looking for! All the best!
@@frederikboving I own both lenses and the 28-105 is about half the size of the 24-120 with noticeably less distortion on each end. There is some CA but as stated it is correctable. I'm an old school old guy and having the semi-macro at my fingertips is VERY convenient. I consider this lens the handiest lens in my kit which also includes the 35-105 push-pull zoom which is a better made lens that this one. That being said, this lens is made like the old E lenses in the 80s and there are plenty of those still working for a living. To that end I'm looking to obtain a second copy to warehouse.
If it is a DF or D750 you have, I do not think VR is a huge problem for you. I have both. They easily go to ISO3200. DF to ISO6400. So i could have 1/50. I tested 28-105mm with both during night on purpose. It was quite alright.
This lens is 2x the price of older metal 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 AF-D. Is it better? I bought it with fungus for £45. I bought 28-85mm all clear for the same price.
Hi Andy, I only have the AIS version of the 28-85mm and not the AF-D. You can find a little bit of testing of this lens 12 minutes into this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zsnFV1Hg6GA.html If the AF-D version is a heavy and solid as the AIS version, then I cannot imagine the 28-105 is worth double the price. It was after all a super mass produced kit lens back in the days, and albeit an excellent lens, I have a hard time imagining it can justify the price difference, unless of course you need the extra reach.
Just wondering, since the test was conducted in a controlled environment (i.e. studio/tripod), why did you set the ISO to 1250? Contrast and details are lost around that ISO. Maybe to be fair, you should have conducted the test at camera's lowest native ISO?
Hi Kevin, thank you for your feedback! I shot the pictures hand held, with ambient light (rather constant though) and to avoid camera shake I kept the shutter at 1/100 or thereabout. Not lab conditions, but conditions that are close to how I use the camera in real life. So the high ISO was simply to keep the shutter at 1/100th. So inspired by your feedback, I re-did the first test with a tripod, ISO 200, shutter at 1/160th, and varied the aperture as this was the purpose of the first test. TTL flash provided the necessary light I hope - maybe it struggled a bit with the high F-stops. Camera in manual mode. Zoom constant as well. The result is here: www.flickr.com/gp/frederikboving/dG1tL8 - I hope the link works (flicker is not my stronghold). All the files have been processed the same way in LR, I have enabled the lens corrections and I have hit the auto button in LR in the basics panel. And then exported the files as JPGs. There are 8 files with sample shots. The only change from the video is that the euro bill now also has a magnet to hold it steady and I removed the coin. I think the conclusion is the same for the aperture test, that the lens does a pretty good job, also fully open, although it gets sharper and sharper even at F-stops in the 20ties. Let me know if you can access the files and what you make of it. If I was to criticize my test, I would point to the fact that I did not test the lens at varying focal lengths. But then it would have been an even longer video / test. And I probably also should have micro adjusted the AF, or focused manually, so I guess you can go on and on until you end up at DXO mark. Hope this helps.
@@frederikboving Hello Frederik, I am glad you took the feedback positively and I appreciate your time and effort in the lab test. Thank you very much. From what I observed in the pictures you have uploaded in Flickr, the lens has soft characteristics in the left frame when it was shot wide opened. This is what I gathered from several photography forums. It gets better when it is stopped down to f7.1 onwards. I am still considering whether to purchase this lens or not. To be honest, your video peaked my interest in this lens.
Oh, lens evaluation is a big subject. I always buy from professionals so I can return the goods if I am not happy with the product. I would look for fungus and test the lens for CA, but IMHO you really don't know the lens until after a few weeks of shooting.
The exact same question i had. My advise apart from the physical condition of the lens, u can also check the fungus , haze or dust by pointing your phone flash at the lens wide open. Check the autofocus if its working fine .. And take a pic at 28 mm and 105mm at minimum and max aperture settings. Then compare the centre and all four corners for sharpness.
Excellent review - very helpeful - CAs are a pain but removal by most software so not too worried - i am shocked by the comparison with 35-70 2.8 which i always held in vvv high regard however never used it below F5.6 as it is too soft (at least my sample) - can i please also ask your view if the 28-105 holds up with a 24 megapixel full frame - ? also any thoughts on micro contrast and colour rendition - many thanks once again (i have subscribed and look forward to more on your channel)
Hi Nadeem, and thank you for your kind words! First, I do not comment on color rendition because it is super subjective IMHO. I like Nikon and I think they deliver pretty consistent across all lenses. Tony has a video about color science and he has investigated the issue systematically and I can recommend to watch this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EMfCDujQywY.html. I have never noticed that the 28-105 on my D750 (FF, 24MP) came up short (relative to shooting on my D700), but mind you that I have not been looking for this systematically. I did two very unscientific test shots here: www.flickr.com/gp/frederikboving/5645vA (the last two in the album) and I think the 28-105 hold up good considering it is in competition with the notorious Tokina 100mm! The 28-105 is a great walk around general purpose lens, but I would lever use this lens for say product shoots or portraits - here I would always pick a prime. Not that the 28-105 is bad, a prime is just better. Micro contrast - challenge accepted! Will revert!
@@frederikboving ooops could not write the whole message My 28-105 has arrived and it’s awesome just as u described - this is a solid metal lens - u didn’t tell me that - absolutely amazing on the D750
Thanks..! So which would you choose for best build/zoom quality... 28-85mm or this 28-105mm... im not so concerned about 85-105 difference as build quality and less sample variation..? TY in advance..!
I do not know which 28-85 you are referring to (think there are many), but the 28-105 I believe was a kit lens. So sample variation is high - you have to look carefully to get a good copy that does not have "strange" features like sharp in one side and unsharp in the other etc. And the 105 suffers from massive CA. But if you do find a good copy, it is cheap and light. I seem to remember that the 28-85 I once had (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-c7cdnv_j2F8.html) was very well built but also much heavier. So if built quality is important to you, i'd go with the 28-85.
Very Good Review. I just found your channel and love the detail in your reviews. I just bought one yesterday for a good price. I just bought a D610 and look out for good Glas for a reasonable price. I got the 50mm 1.8D and this one so far, so i think good lenses compared to the buying price. Do you have any recommendations on a „landscape“ lens? Same as this one - good value for a reasonable price? Can be also the age of this one. Thanks!
Thank you Felix! Landscape lens - it depends a bit on whether you like primes or zooms? And if you want the lens to go very wide? I have a playlist with lens reviews here: ru-vid.com/group/PLPjooVCTLG920cfFIaNGqxEz5nzhRhtA3 - there are several good lenses in that list that potentially could serve you well as a landscape lens. I enjoy shooting landscapes with 180mm and 135mm for example - a bit unusual many will say. But I of course also shoot with the 24mm, which is very good if you want to have a large field of view. Hope this helps!
@@kainer2661 Right. I have no experience with this specific lens, but I often find that I agree with Ken Rockwell. Have a look here: kenrockwell.com/nikon/75300.htm#perf - I think his main complaint is that AF is a bit slow, but otherwise he is a happy camper. Hope this helps!
Although not great but its a Good lens. Excellent value for a general purpose lens. It could be budget single lens to travel with... My biggest gripes are: Variable aperture, front filter turns during use and it wont autofocus on the new Z cameras...
i bought it 900 SEK last year. I have to say I am 99% agree with you. haha. :P I have had a 28-300mm G before. Considering the price, usage(small and light), color, sharpness. I value weight a lot in my daily walk-around. I walk though the city 5+ km most of the time. I would easily sell 28-300mm G even I still have both. Only thing I could wish if I could have opposite of the macro range. from 28 - 50 is where i need closer focus the most. I almost always want the shorter ends to have closer focus distance.
Right! I fully agree that the minimal focus distance is important - when doing especially flower photography or macro photography, I always struggle with the lens' ability to focus close up. A factor that is not always addressed in lens reviews!
@@frederikboving exactly. There was a period a lot of AIs lens has "Macro" mode. Some of them can get really close. Like 0.27m. same as a model 18-35G. I really appreciate this kind of settings.
Uh, I am not an F80 expert, but as far as I can google (imaging.nikon.com/lineup/filmcamera/slr/f80/) it looks like the F80 has a built in AF motor, and then it should work. But better be safe than sorry and ask someone who knows for sure that the F80 has the classic AF motor that works with AF lenses.
On the issue of applying the crop factor to the aperture calculation of APSC cameras Nikon DX(1.5x), Canon (1.6x) and M4/3 (2x), we have two schools of opposite thoughts. Most youtubers including Tony & Chelsea have the same thoughts like yours. For the sake of explanation, Nikon DX lens 50mm f/2 is equivilent to FX 75mm f/3. However, youtuber Theoris Apophasis (who always calls himself the ugly, fat bald tattooed guy) has opposite views. He said that, after conversation, the lens should be 75mm f/3, no change in the aperture. I find his views make sense.
I have seen many of TAPs videos, and I find him hard to follow in the sense that he presents his results but not his process, i.e. how he tests. So I am inspired by what he says but never really convinced. This guy: photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso I think explains it well. And I don't understand why people are not convinced when they see the same picture with same bokeh and field of view, and the one taken with the APS-C is is adjusted both in aperture and focal length (and ISO). Instead, some - even Peter McKinnon (!!) - says that full frame has more background blur! How can a sensor have more blur? It records the light it gets. It is because the APS-C is shooting at a higher aperture when comparing same f-stops, and we all know that gives greater depth of field. But I guess this discussion will never end.
Har haft et i ca et år, og er yderest tilfreds. Kromatisk aberration fjerner jeg nemt i Photoshop raw konverter, så det er ikke et problem. Bruger det blandt andet, Til at tage fotos af mine malerier, da optikken ikke fortegner noget nævneværdigt.
I shop at mpb.com - they are not the cheapest, but they are easy to do business with and in my experience their rating of the condition of the products they sell is spot on and very fair. No, I am not sponsored. You can also try Finnish camerastore.com - It's been a while since I did business with them, but they have a large number of items on stock so there is lots to choose from.
180 day return and actual photo of the item being sold. That is what I require. I will pay for service - these people bragging about saving $20 or so for a click bait title on Tube - live & learn.
I look for (1) general impression - many scratches etc indicating a tough life? Test the focus ring - should be smooth with no "funny" sounds. (2) fungus and dust (may not significantly impact image quality but always good to avoid if possible) and (3) sharpness - some copies have elements out of line and hence one part of the image may be sharp whereas the other is soft, even though you have shot a brick wall straight on. So do some "technical" shots to test the lens sharpness. Disclaimer: this is what I look for; the list may not be complete relative to personal preferences.
