| A
MOST POPULAR LENS This
lens, released along with the F100, has become a very popular
companion of the N80/F80 camera. "The
28-105 has been like my Swiss Army Knife of lenses" is
the typical enthusiastic kind of comment from many Nikonians,
whether shooting film or digital SLRs.
-
|
|
AF
28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D IF Zoom Nikkor |
Several
factors come into play to make up the popularity of a lens:
I.
PRICE*
* Quoted from B&H
in the USA as of November 21, 2005 in US dollars, and without
considering rebates
-
|
Lens |
Price
USA USD |
Imported
USD |
- |
28-105mm
f/3.5-4.5D IF AF |
$325 |
$290 |
- |
24-85mm
f/2.8-4D IF AF |
$510 |
$470 |
- |
35-70mm
f/2.8D AF |
$680 |
$540 |
The
28-105mm remains the most economical of the three.
II.
VERSATILITY (From landscapes to head
and shoulders portraits) -
- |
If
you are into portraits, but also want to have the opportunity
of making landscapes, again, the 28-105mm seems the
clear winner for versatility. |
- |
If
the landscapes are the primary concern, then the choice
is the 24-85mm, that still allows for good portraits. |
- |
The
35-70mm allows for moderate wide-angle shots to moderate
close-up portrait shots. |
III.
SPEED (For brighter viewfinder view and available light
shots)
-
|
The
35-70mm has a constant aperture of 2.8 |
- |
Then
the 24-85mm with a 2.8, changing to f/4 as it goes into
85mm |
-
|
The
28-105mm, at a max aperture of 3.5, is the slowest,
hardly any good for ambient light photography, or extreme
selective focus, as expected. Obviously not many of its
happy users are into that type of photography. |
IV. PERFORMANCE (Sharpness -resolution + acutance-
and color rendering)
This is what justifies the price differences.
The order under Price and Versatility is reversed, as optical
performance is highest with the 35-70mm (even when compared with
the 28-70mm f/2.8 AF-S which costs more than twice as much
as shown here),
followed by the 24-85mm and then closely by the 28-105mm.
It is important to note that if apertures are always around or
at f/8, users will hardly notice the difference, especially if
no huge enlargements are made.
It should also be said that the 28-105 nevertheless has remarkable
performance, especially if compared with all other zooms in
the range not listed here.
V. OTHER FACTORS
If you treat your lenses well, built can be no
major problem and it is not a concern at all in any of the lenses
compared here.
Of
course there are other factors (minor to me) such as front element
rotation, etc. and others in the table below. As for
macro mode maximum reproduction ratios, the 28-105mm has 1:2,
very close to that of the 24-85mm with 1:2; for the 35-70mm it
is 1:4; so the three have a quasi-micro capability or macro mode.
-
|
Lens |
Weight |
Size |
Filter
size |
- |
28-105mm
f/3.5-4.5D IF AF |
455g
/ 16.0oz |
73.0
x 81.5mm |
62mm |
- |
24-85mm
f/2.8-4D IF AF |
545g
/ 19.2oz |
78.5
x 82.5mm |
72mm |
- |
35-70mm
f/2.8D AF |
665g
/ 23.5oz |
71.5
x 94.5mm |
62mm |
The
28-105mm lens is the lightest, smallest and
with a standard filter size.
VI. LENS SUPERIORITY
When we talk about a lens being superior to others we usually
refer only to optical performance as an overriding concern, not
to any other factor.
Since
each user has its own priorities in regard to the factors listed
and will assign a different relative weight to each of them,
a lens is truly "inferior" or "superior" depending
on the use it is put up to and the personal preferences of the
user.
As
each lens is designed for specific requirements (including budgets),
each solves a given set of problems while having to make some
compromises as the cost is asked to be lower. Those compromises
are made in either of the previously listed factors. |
