I thought I would let you all know the results of my testing of these two Nikkors. I used a F100 and my trusty Bogen 3021 to photograph our brick wall in good light. I used bubble levels to make sure I was level and square. I used F2.8, 4, 5.6, and F8 at 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 70 mm for the standard zoom. 80, 105, 135, and 200 for the mid-tele lens. What I found was this, at 28mm at F2.8 the right corners were soft, better but still soft at F4, sharp by F5.6. When I say soft corners, I mean the very, very corners. I had the E6 film run, but not cut, so I saw the entire frame as they went through the camera. 35mm was the weakest focal length, the right corners, both top and bottom were soft at 2.8, 4 and 5.6, even sharpness by F8. Again, I mean the very corner of the frame. The slide mount would probably cover the edges, but I am just reporting what I found. 50 and 70 mm were sharp at all apertures. Slight pincusion distortion at 28, no other noticable distortions. The 80-200 was sharp at all focal lengths and apertures with very slight light fall off at 200 F2.8, by F4 illumination was totally even. This did not surprise me as it has been documented before. Both lenses looked identical as far as color, contrast and sharpness (yes the 28-70 is just as sharp as the 80-200). It seemed to me that contrast was best on both lenses at 5.6 and 8, again, no surprises.
The serial numbers are as follow 28-70 - 2244** (80-200) 2377** I hope I have helped.
#1. "80-200 vs 105 vs 135mm" | In response to Reply # 0