Nikon AF Nikkor 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5D Lens
Mar 21, 2018 22:19:32 #
I just ordered this lens from KEH, they rated it's condition as excellent. I figured that for $119 I couldn't go wrong.
Mar 22, 2018 06:40:47 #
I really like my Nikon 28-105. And it has a macro function that works quite well.
Mar 22, 2018 08:37:24 #
Kiron Kid wrote:
I really like my Nikon 28-105. And it has a macro function that works quite well.
I was looking at the 35-70mm which has a micro function, but I really don't do much macro.
Mar 22, 2018 08:44:54 #
Those zoom lenses with a "macro" label are not flat field designs nor will they go to life size. They are simply close focusing... Oh, I have both of the ones mentioned and both are excellent...
Mar 22, 2018 09:13:23 #
wingclui44
Loc: CT USA
Mac wrote:
I was looking at the 35-70mm which has a micro function, but I really don't do much macro.
I was looking at the 35-70mm which has a micro function, but I really don't do much macro.
I have brought the 35-70mm f2.8 AF-D from Adorama recently, I plan to use itwith my Df on my daughter's wedding on May. I have been doing shooting practice with this lens since getting it. It's super sharp. I won't and can't afford to buy the 24-70mm f2.8. I am very happy getting this old pro lens.
Mar 22, 2018 09:56:55 #
"I really like my Nikon 28-105. And it has a macro function that works quite well."
You took words from my mouth. Precisely yesterday I was looking at Pitman Photo, our local camera store, for a 62mm polarizer filter to use with my lens for a planned trip to Europe this coming April. Obviously, there are many other lenses that can be used and the 18-140 comes to mind just because it is a popular one for DX bodies. My lens does very well with a FX body.
The "macro" function is handy. The 28-105 f3.5-4.5 D has very little distortion and it is sharp, at least my sample is.
The 35-105 you just bought should have a similar performance and it will be ideal with your FX body. For my wide angle shots I use my 12-24 f4 AFS Nikon lens with both cameras. Because it is a DX lens I can use it with my D610 at focal lengths between 18 and 24mm without vignettes and that has been very convenient for me because the 12-24 f4 is SHARP.
Good luck with your new lens.
You took words from my mouth. Precisely yesterday I was looking at Pitman Photo, our local camera store, for a 62mm polarizer filter to use with my lens for a planned trip to Europe this coming April. Obviously, there are many other lenses that can be used and the 18-140 comes to mind just because it is a popular one for DX bodies. My lens does very well with a FX body.
The "macro" function is handy. The 28-105 f3.5-4.5 D has very little distortion and it is sharp, at least my sample is.
The 35-105 you just bought should have a similar performance and it will be ideal with your FX body. For my wide angle shots I use my 12-24 f4 AFS Nikon lens with both cameras. Because it is a DX lens I can use it with my D610 at focal lengths between 18 and 24mm without vignettes and that has been very convenient for me because the 12-24 f4 is SHARP.
Good luck with your new lens.
Mar 22, 2018 10:47:57 #
wingclui44 wrote:
I have brought the 35-70mm f2.8 AF-D from Adorama recently, I plan to use itwith my Df on my daughter's wedding on May. I have been doing shooting practice with this lens since getting it. It's super sharp. I won't and can't afford to buy the 24-70mm f2.8. I am very happy getting this old pro lens.
Congratulations to you and good luck to your daughter on her upcoming wedding.
I agree with you on the 24-70mm, too expensive. I hope I'm as happy with the 35-105mm as you are with the 35-70mm.
Mar 22, 2018 11:27:35 #
wingclui44
Loc: CT USA
Mac wrote:
Congratulations to you and good luck to your daughter on her upcoming wedding.
I agree with you on the 24-70mm, too expensive. I hope I'm as happy with the 35-105mm as you are with the 35-70mm.
I agree with you on the 24-70mm, too expensive. I hope I'm as happy with the 35-105mm as you are with the 35-70mm.
Thank you! Mac, I did only one time on wedding for my friend long time ago with film camera, I can't refuse that my daughter asked me to do for her, I think I can handle it. Be confident of myself!
Yes the 24-70 is way too expensive, besides it doesn't have aperture ring that I can set it directly and fast. The 35-70 does have it. The extra wide of 24mm that I won't use it for group portrait anyway, but at 35mm that's perfect!
Mar 22, 2018 12:34:34 #
I'm thinking of selling a 28-80, 3.3-5.6 g & 35-105, 3.5-4.5 D. Anybody know what they're worth?
Mar 22, 2018 12:37:55 #
Not much... I have the 35-105 and don't use it. Check "sold" listings on eBay for current selling prices. Of course, it all depends on their condition too. Ooops, mine is the AF 35-135 F3.5-4.5D
rstipe wrote:
I'm thinking of selling a 28-80, 3.3-5.6 g & 35-105, 3.5-4.5 D. Anybody know what they're worth?
Mar 22, 2018 12:41:04 #
rstipe wrote:
I'm thinking of selling a 28-80, 3.3-5.6 g & 35-105, 3.5-4.5 D. Anybody know what they're worth?
The 35-105 in excellent condition cost me $119 from KEH.
Mar 22, 2018 12:47:42 #
A 3rd party sale is different than true value...Here is a link to the "sold" listing for the lens on eBay...
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=Nikon+AF+Nikkor+35-105mm+f%2F3.5-4.5D&_in_kw=1&_ex_kw=&_sacat=0&LH_Sold=1&_udlo=&_udhi=&_samilow=&_samihi=&_sadis=15&_stpos=30132&_sargn=-1%26saslc%3D1&_salic=1&_sop=12&_dmd=1&_ipg=200&LH_Complete=1
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=Nikon+AF+Nikkor+35-105mm+f%2F3.5-4.5D&_in_kw=1&_ex_kw=&_sacat=0&LH_Sold=1&_udlo=&_udhi=&_samilow=&_samihi=&_sadis=15&_stpos=30132&_sargn=-1%26saslc%3D1&_salic=1&_sop=12&_dmd=1&_ipg=200&LH_Complete=1
Mac wrote:
The 35-105 in excellent condition cost me $119 from KEH.
Mar 22, 2018 13:01:25 #
I grabbed the Tamron SP 24-135, because of the wider 24mm focal length.
Mar 22, 2018 13:01:36 #
wingclui44 wrote:
Thank you! Mac, I did only one time on wedding for my friend long time ago with film camera, I can't refuse that my daughter asked me to do for her, I think I can handle it. Be confident of myself!
Yes the 24-70 is way too expensive, besides it doesn't have aperture ring that I can set it directly and fast. The 35-70 does have it. The extra wide of 24mm that I won't use it for group portrait anyway, but at 35mm that's perfect!
Yes the 24-70 is way too expensive, besides it doesn't have aperture ring that I can set it directly and fast. The 35-70 does have it. The extra wide of 24mm that I won't use it for group portrait anyway, but at 35mm that's perfect!
I'm sure you will do a great job photographing the wedding, and I'm sure your daughter and everyone else will love the photographs.
I don't care for the distortion at 24mm. I do have the AF-D 24mm f/2.8 but I don't use it much.
Mar 22, 2018 13:10:11 #
What editing program do you use?.... Much of the distortion can be corrected in Lightroom...
Mac wrote:
I'm sure you will do a great job photographing the wedding, and I'm sure your daughter and everyone else will love the photographs.
I don't care for the distortion at 24mm. I do have the AF-D 24mm f/2.8 but I don't use it much.
I don't care for the distortion at 24mm. I do have the AF-D 24mm f/2.8 but I don't use it much.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.