Which tele zoom for Nikon?

[BenediktW]

Hi folks!

I´m thinking about getting tele zoom for my D50. I don´t want to spend a lot of money, but I might like some flexibility between my Nikkor 85mm F1,8 and 200mm F4 primes.

Three ideas have come to my mind:

- Nikon 75-150mm F3,5 Series E (I already had one, it was very good, but mechanically worn out, so I sold it)

- Tamron SP 70-210mm F3,5 Adaptall (only heard good things about it, going cheap)

- Mamiya Sekor C 105-210mm F4,5 ULD (I have the adapter, and this is said to be a great lens)

What do you think, how would you rate them? I have to add, I don´t like the handling of push-pull-zooms very much.


Thanks and best regards

Benedikt

[ManualFocus-G]

I can always recommend a Tamron 103A 80-210/3.8-4 or 46A 70-210/3.8-4. They're excellent quality lenses, and I actually prefer carrying it to the 70-210/3.5 SP model as it's lighter

[BenediktW]

Thanks!
These might also be a good idea... Although I have to admit, this one has also caught my attention (while researching your recommendations):

http://www.adaptall-2.com/lenses/52A.html

I have no idea how it performs compared to the lenses you named, but the non-push-pull-zoom looks appealing.

Does anyone perhaps have an idea on manual Nikkor zooms in this focal range? I know a lot of primes, but I don´t have much information or opinion on these...


Regards

Benedikt

[ManualFocus-G]

I have this one too It's a little lighter than the constant f3.5 version and has a 1:2 macro mode. It's a really nice lens actually and always sells for quite a lot less than it's younger brother. Resolution isn't as high though.

Here's some samples from last year:

http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-sp-70-210mm-52a-day-at-the-farm-t15175,highlight,52a.html

[patrickh]

The nikkor 50-135/3.5 is another sleeper. Better than the E series option. Nice range on a D50.


patrickh

[BenediktW]

Could have guessed it... So you´re a real collector of Tamrons?

Your pictures from the farm are really great. You captured a lot of mimics and character among the animals. The sheep are great models in particular

As far as the lens is concerned, i think it´s pretty good but not excellent. You said in your comment that the F3,5 SP is clearly better overall?

The Tamrons are tempting me because of the low prices which would help my conscience, but this one is really tempting me:

Click here to see on Ebay.de

What a beauty, and I know how these lenses feel... Greatest focus feeling and precision I have ever felt.


Regards

Benedikt


Edit:

One of your farm pictures reminds me of my stay in Scotland in 1993. We stayed at a nice farmhouse B&B on the Isle of Skye, and there was a little sheep called Leonardo. He had to be fed with a baby bottle because his mother didn´t give milk, and it was great fun to watch every morning.

[BenediktW]

Hi Patrick!

Hmm... 50-135 F3,5, I should have a look at it. But it doesn´t make that much sens for me as I´ve already got a AF-Nikkor 28-105mm, so the additional 30mm don´t take me that far. Which also applies a bit to the 75-150mm...
Can you give me an IQ comparison for the 50-135? Is it better or worse than the 35-70 F3,5, in case you know that one?

Btw, the 28-105 is a GREAT lens, one of the very few reasonably priced, well built, fast AF lenses, and the IQ is fantastic. On top, there´s an amazing macro mode. The only drawback is, you simply can´t focus it manually, the internal gear ratio is so extremely steep.


Regards

Benedikt

[Screamin Scott]

I have the 28-105 AF Nikkor as well & love it also...I like the push pull zooms though. What about the Vivitar Series One zooms 70-210mm (3rd edition Komine made variable aperture version is sweet)

[BenediktW]

You mean the 2,8-4?

[Screamin Scott]

Yes....I have that lens as well as the 1st edition & the 3rd edition is my favorite

[BenediktW]

Ah, this sounds good. I´ll have a closer look at this one, but I´m afraid they´re not cheap to get, right?

I generally like the Vivitars.

[Screamin Scott]

All of the Vivitar Series One's are good (up till the early 90's when Cosina took over) Mine were reasonably priced, although I've had them for awhile. Prices on all lenses seem to always be going up...

[Russ]

Go with the Vivitar Series 1 70-210 (third edition) ƒ/2.8-4. It's VERY good with an excellent macro function. And when you want to use something considerably smaller and lighter, the Kiron 70-150 ƒ/4 is every bit as sharp as the Nikon E 75-150, but smaller and better built. It also doesn't develop the horrendous zoom-creep tha tthe Nikon E version is known for.


Left to right:
Vivitar S-1 70-210 f/3.5 (Kiron made) 1'st edition.
Vivitar S-1 70-210 f/3.5 (Tokina made) 2'nd edition.
Vivitar S-1 70-210 f/2.8-4 (Komine made) 3'rd edition
Kiron 70-210 f/4


Kiron 70-150 f/4

Russ

[cooltouch]

Well, Benedickt, you've gotten some excellent suggestions, but allow me to toss another fine zoom into the mix: the Nikkor 80-200mm f/4.5 AI. It is my understanding that this lens was made in two different versions, the latter being the best. I have the latter one, and I can attest to its sharpness and contrast. In comparison to my other zooms of similar focal lengths, the Nikkor appears to be just a bit more warmer in terms of color.

If you're feeling a bit adventurous and might be willing to consider something cheap, then consider the Korean-made Albinar 80-200mm f/3.9. It is a surprisingly good optic. It was the first zoom lens I ever bought -- back in 1982. That one was in Canon FD mount and was sold scarcely six years later when I changed systems. However, recently I bought another in Nikon mount precisely because I have photos that I've taken with this lens that are just as sharp as those I've taken with lenses costing much more, and because there's also a bit of a nostalgic factor involved. My "new" one is just as nice as my old one was.

[Russ]

[gaeger]

Benedikt: I'll piggyback on the 50-135. That's a very nice lens. But also consider the Nikkor 80-200mm f4.5, as mentioned above. I've picked up three copies of this lens in the past five years for less than $50 each. Here are a couple of images from an AI version (this is the second version):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaeger2/2977531952/sizes/l/in/set-72157607770258330/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaeger2/2977531960/sizes/l/in/set-72157607770258330/

Also consider the Nikkor 35-200mm, one of my favorites. I bought mine at a camera store a couple of years ago for $69. It has great macro capability.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaeger2/4161188850/sizes/l/in/set-72157623237307360/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaeger2/3963185511/sizes/l/in/set-72157623237307360/

Sorry if I muddied the picture!

[cooltouch]

Hey Russ,

Well, I began a reply, but decided to go ahead and mount my f/4.5 Nikkor and my f/3.9 Albinar to my F2 and take a look. My F2 currently has the F screen installed -- the central microprism spot, no split image. I find that microprisms become non-functional before the split-image aid does. Anyway, with both the Albinar f/3.9 and the Nikkor f/4.5, I have to maneuver my eye about somewhat before I can find a position where the microprisms disappear. There isn't much difference between the two in that regard. With a split-image screen, I would expect them to be equally functional as well.

A quick comparison between the two zooms also shows essentially no difference in viewfinder brightness. So, my answer would have to be that, based on my experiences with these two lenses, the differences between f/3.9 and f/4.5 are negligible.

[BenediktW]

Thanks for this whole lot of recommendations!

Well, I think the 50-135 is out, it sells between 100 and 200€. For this money, I´d get the Mamiya with a little patience.

The 35-200 is no option as well, it has beautiful colours as far as I can see, but the sharpness isn´t satisfying at all, I think. Additionally, it renders surfaces similar to the AF-Nikkor 70-210mm F4-5,6, they look unnatural in some way (was my reason to sell that lens).

So the Tamrons, the Vivitar Series 1, the Nikkor 80-200 F4,5 and the Mamiya remain.

But looking at the specs of the Nikkor, I noticed there is also a 80-200mm F4 AiS. Can you tell me anything about this one? What are the differences to the F4,5 version?


Thanks so far and best regards

Benedikt

[f6cvalkyrie]

Hi,

I recommend this one :

[gaeger]

Hi Benedikt: I've had an 80-200 f4 AIS for only a short time, so I don't have a lot of images from it. It's a larger lens than the f4.5 versions and handles differently. Color rendition seems to be similar to the 4.5, and it's pretty sharp. (Doesn't take 52mm filters, if that is a consideration.) Here is one frame with it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaeger2/4286044260/sizes/l/

[BenediktW]

Hey, this picture is truly great!

Well, OK, so the F4,5 version is not as bulky? That´s a consideration. But the weight is pretty the same (750g/810g, while the old F4,5 is even 830g!).

Your picture is really sharp and very 3D, although the bokeh is somewhat aggressive.


It´s really difficult. A shame that nobody has experience with the Mamiya.


Regards

Benedikt

[gaeger]

Sorry, Benedikt: I just compared the AI 4.5 and AIS 4 side by side, and they're nearly the same in length! Don't know why I thought the AIS was bigger, maybe just the way it handles.

[BenediktW]

Hey, no problem at all

Maybe it just appears like that because of the filter thread?

[BenediktW]

Update:

Thanks for all this great input. I have acquired a lens I will give a serious try. We´ll see if I keep it

It´s the Tamron 70-210 F3,8-4, now I only need an Adaptall 2-mount for Nikon. It comes with a Minolta MD mount, so in case someone wants to trade...?


Regards

Benedikt

[Boomer Depp]

More then a few listed here....and six have free shipping for US $18.90

http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_nkw=Tamron+adaptall-2+nikon&_sacat=0&_trksid=p3286.m270.l1313&_dmpt=Lens_Accessories&_odkw=Tamron+adaptall-2&_osacat=0