Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 vs. 18-70mm Kit lens?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 21, 2005.

  1. I have an opportunity to pick up a 28-70mm f/2.8 locally for an excellent
    price and have a few questions before taking the plunge. I already have an
    18-70mm kit lens that does what I need it to do reasonably well, but I feel
    there's room for improvement. I read some of the reviews and found them
    informative, but nothing that really compares these two lenses side-by-side.
    My biggest concerns would be optical superiority and low light performance
    over the 18-70 since the 28-70 is so much heavier and larger than the 18-70.
    Would the possible improvement in low light performance, sharpness, and
    bokeh offset the disadvantages of its size and weight? Thanks.





    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 21, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Roger Guest

    Rita,

    The two lenses are very different. From a DSLR perspective, 18-70 is a
    relatively slow general purpose zoom lens and the 28-70 is a
    professional grade portrait lens that just happens to touch on the
    "normal" (42mm FF equiv) range.

    There are few side by side comparisons because these two lenses are
    not in the same league in either, optically quality, build quality or
    coverage angle. If you read individual review on the 28-70 in either
    film or DSLR forums you will find that few other lenses in this focal
    length range can surpass it optically. The optical properties of the
    28-70 are closer to the 17-35 f2.8 AF-S professional lens for rough
    comparisons. Perhaps you can find some side-by-side comparisons of the
    18-70 and 17-35 lenses and extrapolate from there for the 28-70,
    knowing that the 28-70 is very different from a coverage perspective.

    The 28-70 f2.8 AF-S lens is physically overwhelming on even large
    cameras - it's a big, heavy, clunky lens with a forbidding petal lens
    hood. This may also be something to consider.

    Good luck in your search.

    Regards,
    Roger
     
    Roger, Sep 21, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    bmoag Guest

    You should try to clarify in your mind what it is that the 18-70
    specifically does not deliver for you that is significant enough you would
    want to get another lens.
    I encourage you to get more lenses-why else have an SLR type camera-but you
    should have a good idea what you need and want in order to avoid buyer's
    remorse.
    Is it maximum aperture for low light shooting or selective focus?
    Is it a wider or more telephoto angle of view?
    Do you want to be mentally assured that the lens is of superior optical
    quality whether your particular skills or needs are able to take advantage
    of that quality? (This seems to be a big factor on this newsgroup)
    In truth the 18-70 is an astoundingly good lens for general use on the D70,
    particularly if you learn to compensate for its relatively few foibles in
    Photoshop.
    I would humbly suggest you invest in an f1.8 50mm Nikon lens: fast,
    excellent quality, bargain basement price even brand new (about $100). If
    you are relatively new to SLR photography using this lens will be a great
    learning experience.
     
    bmoag, Sep 21, 2005
    #3
  4. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Proconsul Guest

    <snip>


    | The two lenses are very different. From a DSLR perspective, 18-70 is a
    | relatively slow general purpose zoom lens and the 28-70 is a
    | professional grade portrait lens that just happens to touch on the
    | "normal" (42mm FF equiv) range.
    |
    | There are few side by side comparisons because these two lenses are
    | not in the same league in either, optically quality, build quality or
    | coverage angle. If you read individual review on the 28-70 in either
    | film or DSLR forums you will find that few other lenses in this focal
    | length range can surpass it optically. The optical properties of the
    | 28-70 are closer to the 17-35 f2.8 AF-S professional lens for rough
    | comparisons. Perhaps you can find some side-by-side comparisons of the
    | 18-70 and 17-35 lenses and extrapolate from there for the 28-70,
    | knowing that the 28-70 is very different from a coverage perspective.
    |
    | The 28-70 f2.8 AF-S lens is physically overwhelming on even large
    | cameras - it's a big, heavy, clunky lens with a forbidding petal lens
    | hood. This may also be something to consider.

    Fully agreed - BUT, I just bought a Tamron Di digital zoom f2.8. This lens,
    a clone of the Nikon lens under discussion, is an exceptionally high
    quality, sharp lens. Moreover, it's NO BIGGER than the Nikon kit lens, uses
    the same size filters and weigh less. Food for thought. Oh, it's also
    considerably cheaper.....

    PC
     
    Proconsul, Sep 21, 2005
    #4
  5. Thanks for all your help. I think you pretty much touched on all of my
    concerns. I presently have and use a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR and it's big and
    heavy as well. So, as much as I dislike the size and weight of the VR, I
    find it highly beneficial to lug it around. I try to avoid using the lens
    hood if I can help it. I really love this lens and my hope is to find a
    zoom lens under 70mm that will give me the same performance.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 21, 2005
    #5
  6. Thanks for the wonderful and informative tips. You do bring up some valid
    considerations that I will need to think about. I agree with you on having
    a selection of lenses. I do have a few. My favorites that I use the most
    and always carry around are the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR, Micro Nikkor 105 f/2.8,
    and the 18-70mm. I do have other lenses including the 50mm f/1.4 that I
    really like for low light shooting. I really like having the option to
    zoom, though, and I can't zoom with the 50mm. In my opinion, the 18-70 does
    seem to lack the sharpness and low light performance I want, but gives me
    the focal length I want. You have given me some more aspects to consider.
    Thanks again.





    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 21, 2005
    #6
  7. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Robert Brace Guest

    I have & use the 17-35, 28-70 and the 80-200. All 2.8 AF-S and all heavy
    and built like tanks, but they are all sharp, fast-focusing and worth every
    penny. I have used them with the F100, F4, F5 and the D2 series and can
    find no reason to criticize them, except they are a bit heavy. I also use
    the AF 200 f4.5 macro lens, so I know sharpness when I see it (or not!!).
    You should not be disappointed.
    Bob
     
    Robert Brace, Sep 22, 2005
    #7
  8. Thanks for your input. I'll probably just go ahead and grab the 28-70 since
    it does seem like I won't be disapointed. It's always fun to collect
    lenses.





    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 22, 2005
    #8
  9. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Monty Bonner Guest

    Hello to all,

    I just recently purchased the D70s Kit, and it comes with a 18-70 as well.
    It has been many years since I owned a nice camera such as this and don't
    know enough about it use or "lenses" at all. I do know that there are
    several quality levels of Nikkor lenses and I don't know them apart. Nikon
    produces a catalog which lists all their products and have not found a spot
    on the website to order one. My friend showed me his and it goes into a lot
    better description on which lenses have what optics and how many groups and
    lots of information I don't know about. That catalog will assist me in
    picking up another lense. My friend has the 70-200mm f/2.8VR and loves it.
    My Girlfriend has the N80 Camera so my lenses purchase will have to include
    her camera so we can share them.

    A quick explanation on the difference levels of quality of Nikkor lenses
    would be of great help.

    Thank you in advance.

    Monty
     
    Monty Bonner, Oct 6, 2005
    #9
  10. Do you think you will see better optics? I suspect all the effort was
    dedicated to increasing speed and making it constant across focal
    lengths. If speed is the primary motivating factor for you, then get
    the 28-70. If a bit reduced speed (especially at the higher focal
    lengths) is alright and you would like the wider angles, then I think
    you should keep the 18-70. Personally, I shoot more landscape and
    wildlife, so I prefer either the wide angles [speed isn't required] or
    fast telephoto (beyond 70mm).
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Oct 6, 2005
    #10
  11. I am no pro, but I haven't seen any signs of the 18-70 lacking in
    sharpness. I have been very impressed with it. My point of reference
    for sharpness is my Nikkor Micro 60mm.
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Oct 6, 2005
    #11
  12. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Jim Guest

    Nikon does not sell direct to the public. You can order any lens there from
    B&H. Your local camera shop can also order any lens that you want (as well
    as giving advice when needed).

    I definitely like the kit lens. However, it is not quite wide enough at the
    short end. I might spring for the 12-24 f4 one of these days...
    Jim
     
    Jim, Oct 6, 2005
    #12
  13. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    bob Guest

    In the past I called them (Nikon USA) up and asked for it. Nice people. I
    think its called the "full product catalog" or some such.

    Bob
     
    bob, Oct 6, 2005
    #13
  14. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Ed Ruf Guest

    http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5
    ________________________________________________________
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://EdwardGRuf.com
     
    Ed Ruf, Oct 6, 2005
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.