Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nikon D70 Telephoto Zoom Lens Recommendation

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 5:49:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Okay, folks, my sister-in-law has politely asked me to ship her a zoom lens
in the range of 70-200 for the Nikon D70 that she currently has in Brazil.
Choosing B&H Photo as a possible vendor, I have located the following
lenses:

Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, Imported,
$114.95
Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, USA, $139.95
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
Lens, Imported, $1,449.95
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
Lens, USA, $1,599.95, after rebate $1,449.95
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
Lens, Light Grey, Imported $1,469.95 (back ordered)
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
Lens, Light Grey, USA $1,649.95 (back ordered)
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
Imported, $1,229.95
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Atofocus Lens,
USA, $1,429.95, after rebate $1,329.95
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
black, Imported, out of stock, $99.95
Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
black, USA, $129.95
Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
Imported, $279.95
Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens, USA,
$299.95, after rebate $249.95
Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens,
Imported, $799.95
Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens, USA,
$899.95, after rebate $799.95

Can a Nikon expert please tell me the relative merits of these lenses as
compared to one another? I am doing my own research, but I'd like to hear
some real world opinions on these lenses. In particular, I would like to
know why a light grey lens commands more money and is back ordered than the
same lens in black, or is it really the same lens? What are the G lenses?
I owned the D70 but gave it to my relative right before she left for Brazil
on an assignment; therefore, I didn't get to read the owner's manual to see
what the D70 is compatible with.

When I first talked to her about this, she wanted the Telephoto AF Micro
Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D lens, but after I mentioned the 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED
IF black lens, she decided that it would be a more versatile lens and agreed
with me.

What do you experts think?

Thanks in advance.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 5:49:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 01:49:52 GMT, "Clyde Torres"
<clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

>Okay, folks, my sister-in-law has politely asked me to ship her a zoom lens
>in the range of 70-200 for the Nikon D70 that she currently has in Brazil.
>Choosing B&H Photo as a possible vendor, I have located the following
>lenses:
>
> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, Imported,
>$114.95
> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, USA, $139.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
>Lens, Imported, $1,449.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
>Lens, USA, $1,599.95, after rebate $1,449.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
>Lens, Light Grey, Imported $1,469.95 (back ordered)
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
>Lens, Light Grey, USA $1,649.95 (back ordered)
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
>Imported, $1,229.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Atofocus Lens,
>USA, $1,429.95, after rebate $1,329.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
>black, Imported, out of stock, $99.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
>black, USA, $129.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
>Imported, $279.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens, USA,
>$299.95, after rebate $249.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens,
>Imported, $799.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens, USA,
>$899.95, after rebate $799.95
>
>Can a Nikon expert please tell me the relative merits of these lenses as
>compared to one another? I am doing my own research, but I'd like to hear
>some real world opinions on these lenses. In particular, I would like to
>know why a light grey lens commands more money and is back ordered than the
>same lens in black, or is it really the same lens? What are the G lenses?
>I owned the D70 but gave it to my relative right before she left for Brazil
>on an assignment; therefore, I didn't get to read the owner's manual to see
>what the D70 is compatible with.
>
>When I first talked to her about this, she wanted the Telephoto AF Micro
>Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D lens, but after I mentioned the 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED
>IF black lens, she decided that it would be a more versatile lens and agreed
>with me.
>
>What do you experts think?
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>Clyde Torres
>
>

How about at least giving a price range. $115 to $1600 is a bit broad.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 6:31:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0jt351tdnl4pl68gc0m8flo322k7ccasgl@4ax.com...
> How about at least giving a price range. $115 to $1600 is a bit broad.

I hear you, Oliver. How about the price range of $115 to $1600? My
sister-in-law is worth every penny of whatever it is that I buy her. I will
go the extra kilometer for this lady, so $1600 is no biggee to me. However,
I want to hear from the experts as to what lenses are good and what they
would want me to buy if they were my relative. Sometimes higher prices is
not better. For example, some lenses may look great but weigh a lot.

By the way, she has the standard 18-70mm lens that came with the D70 kit.
She's looking to extend her range above this lens.

Thank you for responding so quickly.

Clyde Torres
Related resources
April 5, 2005 6:35:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Clyde Torres" <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote in message
news:49m4e.29702$Pc.18803@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> Okay, folks, my sister-in-law has politely asked me to ship her a zoom
lens
> in the range of 70-200 for the Nikon D70 that she currently has in Brazil.
> Choosing B&H Photo as a possible vendor, I have located the following
> lenses:
>
> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, Imported,
> $114.95
> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, USA, $139.95
Very limited usefulness on a D70. Don't buy.
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
Autofocus
> Lens, Imported, $1,449.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
Autofocus
> Lens, USA, $1,599.95, after rebate $1,449.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
Autofocus
> Lens, Light Grey, Imported $1,469.95 (back ordered)
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
Autofocus
> Lens, Light Grey, USA $1,649.95 (back ordered)
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus
Lens,
> Imported, $1,229.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Atofocus
Lens,
> USA, $1,429.95, after rebate $1,329.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
> black, Imported, out of stock, $99.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
> black, USA, $129.95
These two lenses don't have a good reputation. All I know is what I read
though.
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
> Imported, $279.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
USA,
> $299.95, after rebate $249.95
These two lenses have a good reputation.
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens,
> Imported, $799.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens, USA,
> $899.95, after rebate $799.95
These two lenses have been outstanding since they were first introduced a
long time ago.
>
> Can a Nikon expert please tell me the relative merits of these lenses as
> compared to one another? I am doing my own research, but I'd like to hear
> some real world opinions on these lenses. In particular, I would like to
> know why a light grey lens commands more money and is back ordered than
the
> same lens in black, or is it really the same lens? What are the G lenses?
The difference between the black and light grey is the color. Light grey
looks better and does not get quite so hot.
G lenses have no mechanical diaphragm (sp?).
> I owned the D70 but gave it to my relative right before she left for
Brazil
> on an assignment; therefore, I didn't get to read the owner's manual to
see
> what the D70 is compatible with.
Every AF lens will work quite well.
>
> When I first talked to her about this, she wanted the Telephoto AF Micro
> Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D lens, but after I mentioned the 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS
ED
> IF black lens, she decided that it would be a more versatile lens and
agreed
> with me.
Not if she reallly wants to make macro shots.
By the way, she might be able to get warranty service on the grey market
lenses in Brasil. It is highly unlike that any of these lenses will need
repair.

Jim
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 6:35:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> writes:
> > Choosing B&H Photo as a possible vendor, I have located the following
> > lenses:

A couple are manual focus, so cross those off. Also, she won't need
a USA warranty in Brazil, so cross those off. And I'll skip over
the backordered ones. That leaves:

> > Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
> Autofocus Lens, Imported, $1,449.95

This is a great lens, but huge and bulky.

> > Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus
> > Lens, Imported, $1,229.95

Also a great lens but huge and bulky. Slower than the 70-200 but
longer telephoto. I'd go for the 70-200 unless you know she needs
extra-long.

> > Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
> > black, Imported, out of stock, $99.95

This lens isn't very good. The G means no aperture control on the
lens (use the control on the camera instead) and there's nothing wrong
with that as long as you're only using AF cameras which have that
control. It's just this particular lens is not very good.

> > Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
> > Imported, $279.95

Better version of the above lens, reasonably compact and not too
expensive. This might be your best choice. The 70-200/2.8 etc. are
professional lenses and hard to take anywhere because of their size.

> > Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens,
> > Imported, $799.95

Older version of 70-200/2.8 but still excellent. Big and bulky though.

You could also consider the non-zoom 180/2.8 EDIF AF which is fantastic,
and much smaller than the big zooms.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 6:45:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:aQm4e.8125$c76.2733@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
First, Clyde wrote:
>> When I first talked to her about this, she wanted the Telephoto AF Micro
>> Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D lens, but after I mentioned the 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS
> ED
>> IF black lens, she decided that it would be a more versatile lens and
> agreed with me.

Then Jim wrote:
> Not if she reallly wants to make macro shots.
> By the way, she might be able to get warranty service on the grey market
> lenses in Brasil. It is highly unlike that any of these lenses will need
> repair.
>
> Jim

I understand, Jim, and I gave her the option of buying the AF Micro Nikkor
105mm lens, but she decided on her own that she would rather have the
telephoto. I offered the Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D
G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus Lens, USA, for $1,449.95 after rebate, and I'm pretty
sure she started lusting for it. One thing that boggles my mind is why the
grey colored version costs more and is out of stock. It's as if it's in
greater demand at a steeper price!

The lens that I selected for her is one of the more expensive. I would like
opinions from experts as to whether this lens is really worth the money or
if I can get something cheaper that is very, very close or even better.

She normally lives in Brooklyn Heights, NY, and she's on assignment to
Brazil for two years. She can possibly go with the grey market lens and
have it serviced by B&H. One worry I have is that when one of her cohorts
hand carries this lens to her from NYC to Brazil, either customs in Brazil
or customs in the USA will give her shiite when she goes through customs.

Thanks for responding so quickly.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 6:52:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Clyde Torres wrote:
> "Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:0jt351tdnl4pl68gc0m8flo322k7ccasgl@4ax.com...
>
>>How about at least giving a price range. $115 to $1600 is a bit broad.
>
>
> I hear you, Oliver. How about the price range of $115 to $1600? My
> sister-in-law is worth every penny of whatever it is that I buy her. I will
> go the extra kilometer for this lady, so $1600 is no biggee to me. However,
> I want to hear from the experts as to what lenses are good and what they
> would want me to buy if they were my relative. Sometimes higher prices is
> not better. For example, some lenses may look great but weigh a lot.
>
> By the way, she has the standard 18-70mm lens that came with the D70 kit.
> She's looking to extend her range above this lens.
>
> Thank you for responding so quickly.
>
> Clyde Torres
>
>
I'll go WAY out on a limb here and suggest that the $1600 lens is
probably of better quality than the $115 one. However, maybe a little
information on what kind of photography she does would help people make
a recommendation.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 7:07:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote in message
news:7xr7hqym3h.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...

Paul, this is very good advice. I will take it in but wait for others to
respond.

I thank you very much for your expert opinion on this. The 180mm might be
the lens to get, since it is not so bulky, yet fantastic! In the end, I
will run all this by her so that she weighs in, too.

I still want to hear others, so I'll wait patiently.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 9:40:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:45:29 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "Clyde Torres"
<clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:


>I understand, Jim, and I gave her the option of buying the AF Micro Nikkor
>105mm lens, but she decided on her own that she would rather have the
>telephoto. I offered the Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D
>G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus Lens, USA, for $1,449.95 after rebate, and I'm pretty
>sure she started lusting for it. One thing that boggles my mind is why the
>grey colored version costs more and is out of stock. It's as if it's in
>greater demand at a steeper price!
>
>The lens that I selected for her is one of the more expensive. I would like
>opinions from experts as to whether this lens is really worth the money or
>if I can get something cheaper that is very, very close or even better.
>
>She normally lives in Brooklyn Heights, NY, and she's on assignment to
>Brazil for two years. She can possibly go with the grey market lens and
>have it serviced by B&H. One worry I have is that when one of her cohorts
>hand carries this lens to her from NYC to Brazil, either customs in Brazil
>or customs in the USA will give her shiite when she goes through customs.

The US version get a 5 year warranty. At mine did when I bought it. If she
has any need for low light photography the f/2.8 lens area bigger help. VR
helps there as well. I love my 70-200mm f/2.8 VR, but it is big and heavy
compared to the rest. Because it is f/2.8 I was able to add a TC later and
still have AF-S and metering work with my D70 when I want even more range.

----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 1:57:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:etr4e.8217$O85.6512@fe08.usenetserver.com...
> I'll go WAY out on a limb here and suggest that the $1600 lens is probably
> of better quality than the $115 one. However, maybe a little information
> on what kind of photography she does would help people make a
> recommendation.

Ron,

I would classify her photography as "general." I'm sure that with the
longer focal length lens, she would switch to people pictures and other such
stuff.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 4:49:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Clyde Torres <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

>"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote
>Paul, this is very good advice. I will take it in but wait for others to
>respond.

I agree with his analysis.

You'd probably need to ask her whether she wants zoom or non-zoom.

You'd also need to find out how she feels about bulk & weight.
If she's not bothered about working with a huge lens, then the
VR 70-200 f2.8 AF-S would be the star. If she's doing general
shooting while walking around, I expect it might be a bit unweildy
and attract attention (Brazil could have some unsavoury parts),
but then again the VR is extremely good for hand-held shooting.

If she wants a zoom and not so bulky, then you are really a bit
stuck in the Nikon range. I'm happy with my used AF 70-210 f4-5.6
(nice and solid, good sharpness) but that's not an option for you.
Don't get MF, for certain. The D70's focussing screen is not good
enough to support MF.

On a big zoom, AF -> AF-S is worth at least 1.5* the price in
value terms (IMO). For my level of shooting, ED probably isn't
worth any more, VR worth 2* the price.

As far as warranty goes, "grey market" is no good for her, since
it only refers to bringing it into B&H for service/swap. She'd
be better off with US legit, which can be serviced anywhere for
5 years. That's probably worth the around 10% more you'll pay,
depending on how complex a lens it is. (I wouldn't get the
VR 70-200 without it).

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 7:53:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Clyde Torres" <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote in message
news:49m4e.29702$Pc.18803@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...

> Okay, folks, my sister-in-law has politely asked me to ship her a zoom
> lens in the range of 70-200 for the Nikon D70 that she currently has in
> Brazil. Choosing B&H Photo as a possible vendor, I have located the
> following lenses:
>
> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, Imported,
> $114.95
> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, USA, $139.95

If you mount a manual-focus lens on a D70, in addition to losing autofocus,
the meter will not work.

These two lenses are the same except that the second one has a USA warranty.
That may not be an issue in Brazil :-)

> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
> Lens, Imported, $1,449.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
> Lens, USA, $1,599.95, after rebate $1,449.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
> Lens, Light Grey, Imported $1,469.95 (back ordered)
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF Autofocus
> Lens, Light Grey, USA $1,649.95 (back ordered)

These four listings are all the same lens, except for USA vs. gray market
and color.
It is a gorgeous lens: Extremely sharp, fast focus, built-in vibration
reduction. f/2.8 makes
it usable in lower light conditions than other lenses. It is also big and
heavy.

> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus
> Lens, Imported, $1,229.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Atofocus Lens,
> USA, $1,429.95, after rebate $1,329.95

These two listings are the same lens. It's quite good, though it doesn't
have the reputation of
the 70-200. It also doesn't focus as fast. On the other hand, it's
slightly smaller, and
goes to 400mm instead of 200mm. 400mm is *very* long on a D70. You can see
a
picture taken with this lens at
http://www.acceleratedcpp.com/authors/koenig/pictures/b...

> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
> black, Imported, out of stock, $99.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
> black, USA, $129.95

Basic all-round telephoto lens. Inexpensive for a reason :-) It is not a
VR lens;
you must have made a typographical error.

> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
> Imported, $279.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
> USA, $299.95, after rebate $249.95

Basically the same specs as the lens above, but with a better optical
design. It is not
a G lens (see my comments below).

> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens,
> Imported, $799.95
> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens, USA,
> $899.95, after rebate $799.95

Superb. Also big and heavy, like the 70-200. The big difference between
this lens and
the 70-200 is that it has no vibration reduction and focusing will be
slower.

> Can a Nikon expert please tell me the relative merits of these lenses as
> compared to one another? I am doing my own research, but I'd like to hear
> some real world opinions on these lenses. In particular, I would like to
> know why a light grey lens commands more money and is back ordered than
> the same lens in black, or is it really the same lens? What are the G
> lenses?

The light grey lenses are more expensive because people are willing to pay
more for them.
There is no difference other than color.

A G lens has no separate aperture ring--the aperture must be controlled from
the camera.
This means that you cannot set the aperture manually on older cameras such
as F90 or F70.
It makes no difference on the D70 or any of the Nikon digital SLRs; so it's
only a question
if you intend to use the lens on an older camera.

> When I first talked to her about this, she wanted the Telephoto AF Micro
> Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D lens, but after I mentioned the 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS
> ED IF black lens, she decided that it would be a more versatile lens and
> agreed with me.

It is indeed more versatile. It is also *much* bigger and heavier. The
80-200 f/2.8,
70-200 f/2.8, and 80-400 f/4-5.6 lenses are all substantial pieces of
equipment,
which you will think twice before wanting to carry. The 70-300 lenses are
much
smaller and lighter, and the ED version is pretty good. Some people will
protest that
you should go for all the quality you can get, but if you leave the lens at
home it doesn't
matter how good it is.

One more alternative you might consider is the 70-180mm f/4-f/5.6 lens. It
is fairly
slow, but it is also quite compact. 180mm is plenty long for the D70 for
most purposes,
and the lens can focus *very* close, almost as close as the 105 macro lens.
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 3:33:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Andrew Koenig" <ark@acm.org> wrote in message
news:Rvy4e.44949$cg1.28109@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> "Clyde Torres" <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote in message
> news:49m4e.29702$Pc.18803@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
>> Okay, folks, my sister-in-law has politely asked me to ship her a zoom
>> lens in the range of 70-200 for the Nikon D70 that she currently has in
>> Brazil. Choosing B&H Photo as a possible vendor, I have located the
>> following lenses:
>>
>> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, Imported,
>> $114.95
>> Zoom Telephoto 70-210 f/4.5-5.6 AIS Manual Focus Lens, USA, $139.95
>
> If you mount a manual-focus lens on a D70, in addition to losing
> autofocus, the meter will not work.
>
> These two lenses are the same except that the second one has a USA
> warranty. That may not be an issue in Brazil :-)
>
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
>> Autofocus Lens, Imported, $1,449.95
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
>> Autofocus Lens, USA, $1,599.95, after rebate $1,449.95
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
>> Autofocus Lens, Light Grey, Imported $1,469.95 (back ordered)
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF
>> Autofocus Lens, Light Grey, USA $1,649.95 (back ordered)
>
> These four listings are all the same lens, except for USA vs. gray market
> and color.
> It is a gorgeous lens: Extremely sharp, fast focus, built-in vibration
> reduction. f/2.8 makes
> it usable in lower light conditions than other lenses. It is also big and
> heavy.
>
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus
>> Lens, Imported, $1,229.95
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Atofocus
>> Lens, USA, $1,429.95, after rebate $1,329.95
>
> These two listings are the same lens. It's quite good, though it doesn't
> have the reputation of
> the 70-200. It also doesn't focus as fast. On the other hand, it's
> slightly smaller, and
> goes to 400mm instead of 200mm. 400mm is *very* long on a D70. You can
> see a
> picture taken with this lens at
> http://www.acceleratedcpp.com/authors/koenig/pictures/b...
>
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
>> black, Imported, out of stock, $99.95
>> Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
>> black, USA, $129.95
>
> Basic all-round telephoto lens. Inexpensive for a reason :-) It is not a
> VR lens;
> you must have made a typographical error.
>
>> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
>> Imported, $279.95
>> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
>> USA, $299.95, after rebate $249.95
>
> Basically the same specs as the lens above, but with a better optical
> design. It is not
> a G lens (see my comments below).
>
>> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens,
>> Imported, $799.95
>> Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Autofocus Lens, USA,
>> $899.95, after rebate $799.95
>
> Superb. Also big and heavy, like the 70-200. The big difference between
> this lens and
> the 70-200 is that it has no vibration reduction and focusing will be
> slower.
>
>> Can a Nikon expert please tell me the relative merits of these lenses as
>> compared to one another? I am doing my own research, but I'd like to
>> hear some real world opinions on these lenses. In particular, I would
>> like to know why a light grey lens commands more money and is back
>> ordered than the same lens in black, or is it really the same lens? What
>> are the G lenses?
>
> The light grey lenses are more expensive because people are willing to pay
> more for them.
> There is no difference other than color.
>
> A G lens has no separate aperture ring--the aperture must be controlled
> from the camera.
> This means that you cannot set the aperture manually on older cameras such
> as F90 or F70.
> It makes no difference on the D70 or any of the Nikon digital SLRs; so
> it's only a question
> if you intend to use the lens on an older camera.
>
>> When I first talked to her about this, she wanted the Telephoto AF Micro
>> Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D lens, but after I mentioned the 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS
>> ED IF black lens, she decided that it would be a more versatile lens and
>> agreed with me.
>
> It is indeed more versatile. It is also *much* bigger and heavier. The
> 80-200 f/2.8,
> 70-200 f/2.8, and 80-400 f/4-5.6 lenses are all substantial pieces of
> equipment,
> which you will think twice before wanting to carry. The 70-300 lenses are
> much
> smaller and lighter, and the ED version is pretty good. Some people will
> protest that
> you should go for all the quality you can get, but if you leave the lens
> at home it doesn't
> matter how good it is.
>
> One more alternative you might consider is the 70-180mm f/4-f/5.6 lens.
> It is fairly
> slow, but it is also quite compact. 180mm is plenty long for the D70 for
> most purposes,
> and the lens can focus *very* close, almost as close as the 105 macro
> lens.

Thank you, Andrew, for a superb write up on these lenses, their functions,
and their merits. I am going to forward this email to her so that she can
weigh in and help decide.

I truly appreciate it.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 3:35:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ken Tough" <ken@objectech.co.uk> wrote in message
news:38w+TXBs0mUCFw2b@objectech.co.uk...
> Clyde Torres <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:
>
>>"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote
>>Paul, this is very good advice. I will take it in but wait for others to
>>respond.
>
> I agree with his analysis.
>
> You'd probably need to ask her whether she wants zoom or non-zoom.
>
> You'd also need to find out how she feels about bulk & weight.
> If she's not bothered about working with a huge lens, then the
> VR 70-200 f2.8 AF-S would be the star. If she's doing general
> shooting while walking around, I expect it might be a bit unweildy
> and attract attention (Brazil could have some unsavoury parts),
> but then again the VR is extremely good for hand-held shooting.
>
> If she wants a zoom and not so bulky, then you are really a bit
> stuck in the Nikon range. I'm happy with my used AF 70-210 f4-5.6
> (nice and solid, good sharpness) but that's not an option for you.
> Don't get MF, for certain. The D70's focussing screen is not good
> enough to support MF.
>
> On a big zoom, AF -> AF-S is worth at least 1.5* the price in
> value terms (IMO). For my level of shooting, ED probably isn't
> worth any more, VR worth 2* the price.
>
> As far as warranty goes, "grey market" is no good for her, since
> it only refers to bringing it into B&H for service/swap. She'd
> be better off with US legit, which can be serviced anywhere for
> 5 years. That's probably worth the around 10% more you'll pay,
> depending on how complex a lens it is. (I wouldn't get the
> VR 70-200 without it).
>
> --
> Ken Tough

Ken, I truly appreciate your comments above. They are very well written and
make a lot of sense. I will forward your email to her and see what she has
to say. She's a pretty sharp lady and will consider your advice as well as
the others.

I thank you very much.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 12:47:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Clyde Torres <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

>Ken, I truly appreciate your comments above.

Cheers. Just to muddy the waters further, Nikkor also makes a
24-120 VR zoom. On a D70, 120mm is a moderately long telephoto
(like a 180mm if you're used to 35mm cameras), and you get all
the benefits of a VR lens. Most comments don't enthuse about
its sharpness, but detailed tests show it's no less sharp than
the 70-300 f4-5.6 and has all the benefits of VR and AF-S.
It's light and portable. As Andrew Koenig nicely put it, it
doesn't matter how great a lens it is if you leave it at home.

http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm
http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 1:30:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ken Tough" <ken@objectech.co.uk> wrote in message
news:iClbMOC6X4UCFw3x@objectech.co.uk...
> Clyde Torres <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:
>
>>Ken, I truly appreciate your comments above.
>
> Cheers. Just to muddy the waters further, Nikkor also makes a
> 24-120 VR zoom. On a D70, 120mm is a moderately long telephoto
> (like a 180mm if you're used to 35mm cameras), and you get all
> the benefits of a VR lens. Most comments don't enthuse about
> its sharpness, but detailed tests show it's no less sharp than
> the 70-300 f4-5.6 and has all the benefits of VR and AF-S.
> It's light and portable. As Andrew Koenig nicely put it, it
> doesn't matter how great a lens it is if you leave it at home.
>
> http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm
> http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html
>
> --
> Ken Tough

She already has the 18-70mm lens that came with the camera body. She's
trying to go way above that. Seems like te 24-120mm lens would be a good
substitute for that one.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 5:22:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Clyde Torres <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

>She already has the 18-70mm lens that came with the camera body. She's
>trying to go way above that. Seems like te 24-120mm lens would be a good
>substitute for that one.

True, but then 120 is almost double the focal length of a 70,
so it does make a difference (for some people).

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 6:22:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 09:30:38 GMT, "Clyde Torres"
<clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

>"Ken Tough" <ken@objectech.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:iClbMOC6X4UCFw3x@objectech.co.uk...
>> Clyde Torres <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Ken, I truly appreciate your comments above.
>>
>> Cheers. Just to muddy the waters further, Nikkor also makes a
>> 24-120 VR zoom. On a D70, 120mm is a moderately long telephoto
>> (like a 180mm if you're used to 35mm cameras), and you get all
>> the benefits of a VR lens. Most comments don't enthuse about
>> its sharpness, but detailed tests show it's no less sharp than
>> the 70-300 f4-5.6 and has all the benefits of VR and AF-S.
>> It's light and portable. As Andrew Koenig nicely put it, it
>> doesn't matter how great a lens it is if you leave it at home.
>>
>> http://www.bythom.com/24120ens.htm
>> http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html
>>
>> --
>> Ken Tough
>
>She already has the 18-70mm lens that came with the camera body. She's
>trying to go way above that. Seems like te 24-120mm lens would be a good
>substitute for that one.
>
>Clyde Torres
>

Take a look at the 28-200 G lens. I use it more than the standard one.
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 2:57:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:t6a851p1bqblfac8dsk9qt0j9ipkde2cs3@4ax.com...

>>She already has the 18-70mm lens that came with the camera body. She's
>>trying to go way above that. Seems like te 24-120mm lens would be a good
>>substitute for that one.
>>
>>Clyde Torres
>>
>
> Take a look at the 28-200 G lens. I use it more than the standard one.

Wow, Oliver, this lens is very light (1.7 oz)! How good are the photos
resulting from this lens?

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 3:06:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <rPZ4e.31893$Pc.25484@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
"Clyde Torres" <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

> "Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:t6a851p1bqblfac8dsk9qt0j9ipkde2cs3@4ax.com...
>
> >>She already has the 18-70mm lens that came with the camera body. She's
> >>trying to go way above that. Seems like te 24-120mm lens would be a good
> >>substitute for that one.
> >>
> >>Clyde Torres
> >>
> >
> > Take a look at the 28-200 G lens. I use it more than the standard one.
>
> Wow, Oliver, this lens is very light (1.7 oz)! How good are the photos
> resulting from this lens?
>
> Clyde Torres

Fairly decent, I have that lens also. Have been relatively happy I use
it both on the D70 and my F100. I actually like it better on the digital.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 3:56:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Clyde Torres" <clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote in message
news:rPZ4e.31893$Pc.25484@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> "Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:t6a851p1bqblfac8dsk9qt0j9ipkde2cs3@4ax.com...
>
>>>She already has the 18-70mm lens that came with the camera body. She's
>>>trying to go way above that. Seems like te 24-120mm lens would be a good
>>>substitute for that one.
>>>
>>>Clyde Torres
>>>
>>
>> Take a look at the 28-200 G lens. I use it more than the standard one.
>
> Wow, Oliver, this lens is very light (1.7 oz)! How good are the photos
> resulting from this lens?
>
> Clyde Torres
>

I really like mine. It's not quite as sharp as the 18-70 or 24-85, but
pretty darn close. I've blown up a shot from my D70 with the 28-200 to
24x32" (printed on my epson 7600) and it is simply stunning.

results are even better on my D2X.

Tom
Anonymous
April 7, 2005 5:16:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:57:27 GMT, "Clyde Torres"
<clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

>"Oliver Costich" <olc-caNOSPAM@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:t6a851p1bqblfac8dsk9qt0j9ipkde2cs3@4ax.com...
>
>>>She already has the 18-70mm lens that came with the camera body. She's
>>>trying to go way above that. Seems like te 24-120mm lens would be a good
>>>substitute for that one.
>>>
>>>Clyde Torres
>>>
>>
>> Take a look at the 28-200 G lens. I use it more than the standard one.
>
>Wow, Oliver, this lens is very light (1.7 oz)! How good are the photos
>resulting from this lens?
>
>Clyde Torres
>

Nikon good. Obviously not the sharpest lens in the world at the price,
but certainly excellent overall. Very good as a general purpose lens.
One review here http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28200g.htm. Another
here
http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/....

Google for others.
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:13:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cudex <cudex@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Little chromatic aberration in front wheel (from 400 shots the 'G'
>didn't do too badly re: CA), but the main problem is softness and
>contrast esp. considering D70 sharpness was set to "hard".

Try shooting in RAW and munging the contrast yourself. What was
the tone compensation set to, "0" or "Auto"? You can always boost
it if you want more contrast, but you'd be best shooting RAW and
seeing what fits best after the shot. In photoshop you could drag
the low end down and make the blacks a bit blacker.

Nice heat haze.


>Where do I go from here, 70-200 f/2.8 zoom or prime AF-S 300mm f/2.8
>D IF-ED II might be the best for action photography?

How do you find you use the 70-300 most often? Zooming mid-range
or at the far end? You could go through the exif of a big sampling
of your tele shots, and check it out. If you have a prime 300mm,
you might find you're missing shots because you can't frame it
from where you're standing (and don't have time to run backwards).
At least you can crop when the zoom doesn't quite reach.

--
Ken Tough
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 12:13:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 20:13:14 +0200, in rec.photo.digital Ken Tough <
>or at the far end? You could go through the exif of a big sampling
>of your tele shots, and check it out.

No need, use FocalPlot for this.
http://www.wega2.vandel.nl/
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 3:02:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <7xr7hqym3h.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid&gt; wrote:

> > > Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens,
> > > black, Imported, out of stock, $99.95
>
> This lens isn't very good. The G means no aperture control on the
> lens (use the control on the camera instead) and there's nothing wrong
> with that as long as you're only using AF cameras which have that
> control. It's just this particular lens is not very good.
>
> > > Zoom Telephoto AF Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Autofocus Lens,
> > > Imported, $279.95
>
> Better version of the above lens, reasonably compact and not too
> expensive. This might be your best choice. The 70-200/2.8 etc. are
> professional lenses and hard to take anywhere because of their size.


Even just starting out with the 70-300 f/4-5.6G I can see its not an
outstanding performer.

Still it is relative as I did get a small reward for a collection of
shots by the 'G' lens as a competitor, after seeing his car
photographed, bought some shots from my web album.

This is a Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6G sample, 1/1000s, f5.6, cropped and 50%
JPEG from Photoshop. I would've liked to shoot a faster shutter but that
was the limit unless I ran a higher ISO (which I will experiment with)

http://www.netspeed.com.au/mark/datsun510.jpg

Little chromatic aberration in front wheel (from 400 shots the 'G'
didn't do too badly re: CA), but the main problem is softness and
contrast esp. considering D70 sharpness was set to "hard".

Where do I go from here, 70-200 f/2.8 zoom or prime AF-S 300mm f/2.8
D IF-ED II might be the best for action photography?
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 3:12:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 12:58:13 +1000, in rec.photo.digital Cudex
<cudex@yahoo.com> wrote:


>Well I like look of freezing the action but the aesthetic you describe
>is more dynamic certainly. In the beginning I want to be sure I did not
>get blurred images. Maybe 1/500 1/250 and panning will work. I feared
>cars would all be blurred and soft so I kept shutter fast.
>
>So much to learn and try I can't wait to get back to the track!

Agreed. It is certainly much easier with a very fast shutter speed. Panning
properly takes practice, which is hard to get. Two of my better attempts
last summer after just getting my D70 and 70-200mm f/2.8 VR.

1/320 sec
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/D70/misc/slid...
and my best at 1/100 sec.
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/D70/misc/slid...

Now, I can show you 10-20+ other shots for each of these that aren't
keepers, but this is the effect I try for.
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 8:13:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ed Ruf" <egruf_usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
news:hhhe51l6okfrm5o0tqura3cng48tgulpmi@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 12:58:13 +1000, in rec.photo.digital Cudex
> <cudex@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Well I like look of freezing the action but the aesthetic you describe
>>is more dynamic certainly. In the beginning I want to be sure I did not
>>get blurred images. Maybe 1/500 1/250 and panning will work. I feared
>>cars would all be blurred and soft so I kept shutter fast.
>>
>>So much to learn and try I can't wait to get back to the track!
>
> Agreed. It is certainly much easier with a very fast shutter speed.
> Panning
> properly takes practice, which is hard to get. Two of my better attempts
> last summer after just getting my D70 and 70-200mm f/2.8 VR.
>
> 1/320 sec
> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/D70/misc/slid...
> and my best at 1/100 sec.
> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/D70/misc/slid...
>
> Now, I can show you 10-20+ other shots for each of these that aren't
> keepers, but this is the effect I try for.


That 2nd shot is pretty darn nice, Ed.

Clyde Torres
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 1:42:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 16:13:40 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "Clyde Torres"
<clyde_torres@yahooo.com> wrote:

>"Ed Ruf" <egruf_usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:hhhe51l6okfrm5o0tqura3cng48tgulpmi@4ax.com...
>> Agreed. It is certainly much easier with a very fast shutter speed.
>> Panning
>> properly takes practice, which is hard to get. Two of my better attempts
>> last summer after just getting my D70 and 70-200mm f/2.8 VR.
>>
>> 1/320 sec
>> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/D70/misc/slid...
>> and my best at 1/100 sec.
>> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/D70/misc/slid...
>>
>> Now, I can show you 10-20+ other shots for each of these that aren't
>> keepers, but this is the effect I try for.
>
>That 2nd shot is pretty darn nice, Ed.

Thanks.
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
!