Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Recommendations for interesting budget lenses for Nikon FX

lens recommendations nikkor

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

Hi,

 

I have a D610 and three 'permanent' lenses (24/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8). I occasionally buy something else, either just to try it or to take a particular type of pic, and then sell it on (hopefully without losing too much) after a few months.

 

Past temporary additions have included Nikkor 80-400, 28-70/2.8, 28-200 and, most recently, a 300/4. The last one was so lovely I may well have kept it but it developed a fault and was returned. Usually I buy them off eBay and sell them the same way.

 

So, I have a small amount of money to spend, about £275, I'm looking for an interesting lens and rather than ponder all by myself I thought I'd put it out there. :rolleyes:

 

What do you recommend?  I prefer to stick to Nikkors and AF.



#2
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D is a possibility...



#3
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,573 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

Another possibility is a MicroNikkor 60/2.8D, the AF 105-s are seldom that cheap. As most macro work is manual focus anyway, the better optical and mechanical quality of the 105/4 or 105/2.8 Ai or AiS might make them interesting despite their lack of AF.



#4
dcbear78

dcbear78

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 701 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationGladstone, Queensland

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D is a possibility...

 

Try the Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro. Much, much cheaper and every single review I found said it was the better lens of the two. I have one, but never owned the 105mm to give a fair comparison.



#5
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

Another possibility is a MicroNikkor 60/2.8D, the AF 105-s are seldom that cheap. As most macro work is manual focus anyway, the better optical and mechanical quality of the 105/4 or 105/2.8 Ai or AiS might make them interesting despite their lack of AF.

I thought about the 60mm but I prefer longer macro lenses.

 

I do take your point about macro and manual focus but, on the occasions when I wasn't using it as a macro, I'd prefer it to be AF.

 

The other point in favour of the 105 is that it would be a useful increase over the 85mm which is currently my longest lens. A 200mm f4 micro would be lovely but they're about four times my budget! :lol:

 

I used to have a 105/2.8 AIS and it was very good indeed. However, there are several 105/2.8 AFs in my price range on ebay at the moment. 


Try the Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro. Much, much cheaper and every single review I found said it was the better lens of the two. I have one, but never owned the 105mm to give a fair comparison.

I'm sure they're lovely but I prefer to stick to Nikkors.

 

I went off third party lenses when my F4 mangled a Sigma 70-210 back in 1994 when I was photographing Glastonbury for an agency.

 

Okay, Nikkors aren't without they problems - I have had AF-S focus motors pack up and the entire front of that 300, I bought recently, came loose but I still have a fondness for them. Illogical, I admit, but it's something I've learned to live with...



#6
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,573 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

Another lens that is a wonderfully creative tool is the 105 DC. I don't know what price they are in the UK, but the defocus control gives a whole other dimension to this 105. It is really three lenses in one as it is the sharpest 105 at longer distances Nikon have ever made with the DC ring in neutral, the defocus if used as intended gives a lot of control over the OOF distribution and if you overcook the defocussing, it turns into a dreamy, soft rendering lens that behaves as if there was a Softar attached to the front.

 

Another lens that can sometimes be found in that price range is the AF 180/2.8. It draws quite similar to the AF 24/2.8, so if you like those qualities it might be a nice addition. 



#7
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

Another lens that is a wonderfully creative tool is the 105 DC. I don't know what price they are in the UK, but the defocus control gives a whole other dimension to this 105. It is really three lenses in one as it is the sharpest 105 at longer distances Nikon have ever made with the DC ring in neutral, the defocus if used as intended gives a lot of control over the OOF distribution and if you overcook the defocussing, it turns into a dreamy, soft rendering lens that behaves as if there was a Softar attached to the front.

 

Another lens that can sometimes be found in that price range is the AF 180/2.8. It draws quite similar to the AF 24/2.8, so if you like those qualities it might be a nice addition. 

They're great suggestions. I'd love either of those lenses, particularly the 180, but sadly they both cost good money over here. The last AF DC I saw was £500 and I don't think the 180 is much cheaper. One day!



#8
dcbear78

dcbear78

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 701 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationGladstone, Queensland

I thought about the 60mm but I prefer longer macro lenses.

I do take your point about macro and manual focus but, on the occasions when I wasn't using it as a macro, I'd prefer it to be AF.

The other point in favour of the 105 is that it would be a useful increase over the 85mm which is currently my longest lens. A 200mm f4 micro would be lovely but they're about four times my budget! :lol:

I used to have a 105/2.8 AIS and it was very good indeed. However, there are several 105/2.8 AFs in my price range on ebay at the moment.

I'm sure they're lovely but I prefer to stick to Nikkors.

I went off third party lenses when my F4 mangled a Sigma 70-210 back in 1994 when I was photographing Glastonbury for an agency.

Okay, Nikkors aren't without they problems - I have had AF-S focus motors pack up and the entire front of that 300, I bought recently, came loose but I still have a fondness for them. Illogical, I admit, but it's something I've learned to live with...


1994 was literally a lifetime ago. Much has changed in the world. Seems really illogical to ignore every, single, review, you will find that says the Nikkor 105mm macro is an inferior lens just because you prefer a certain badge on the side.

But each to their own....

#9
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

1994 was literally a lifetime ago. Much has changed in the world. Seems really illogical to ignore every, single, review, you will find that says the Nikkor 105mm macro is an inferior lens just because you prefer a certain badge on the side.

But each to their own....

I appreciate your comments and I'm sure you are right but I will definitely admit to being illogical :)

I find that, if I do not completely trust something, it begins to get between me and my work when I just want to forget about the gear and concentrate on the image. I have tried many systems over the years and keep returning to Nikons - not because they inspire me but just because I trust them. To be honest, for the photography I do now, if I could afford it I'd buy Leica M and I'd never have to think about equipment ever again.



#10
Brian

Brian

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • Country Flag

I have a Leica M9, M Monochrom, M8, M3, and CL... Many interesting lenses to choose from. The Leica cameras -and lenses- are not without problems. I've worked on a lot of RF lenses. I need to send in the Monochrom for a sensor replacement, which Leica does free of charge owing to a poor design choice in the IR cover glass. The camera is 3 years out of warranty, yet the service is free. They screwed up royally, they take responsibility.

 

My Df has been trouble-free.

 

I have a lot of lenses. Including the AF-Micro-Nikkor-D 105/2.8.  If you want a Macro, good choice. As is the 60/2.8, which I use more. With Nikon- you can choose from many lenses, many dirt-cheap interesting lenses if you don't mind manual focus. There are no autofocus lenses for the Leica M-mount, most of my lenses for the Df are manual focus. The AF-Nikkor 20/2.8 is also a good choice, really takes in more than the 24mm focal length.

 

If you had a Leica...

 

16849191333_18aafb8a1c_o.jpgNikkor105_Monochrom by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

 

15115777258_93da7e2032_o.jpgNikkor_28_F35 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

 

Nikon made many interesting lenses for it...



#11
leighgion

leighgion

    Senior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 167 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMadrid
I have no AF recommendations that are moderate budget, but I got plenty of manual focus recommendations.

Consider a 100mm f/2.8 E. They're cheap, lightweight and remarkably compact for 100mm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#12
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

I have a Leica M9, M Monochrom, M8, M3, and CL... Many interesting lenses to choose from. The Leica cameras -and lenses- are not without problems. I've worked on a lot of RF lenses. 

 

I have a lot of lenses. Including the AF-Micro-Nikkor-D 105/2.8.  If you want a Macro, good choice. As is the 60/2.8, which I use more. With Nikon- you can choose from many lenses, many dirt-cheap interesting lenses if you don't mind manual focus.  The AF-Nikkor 20/2.8 is also a good choice, really takes in more than the 24mm focal length.

 

 

I used to have a 1959 Leica M3 Single-wind with a 1953 5cm Summicrom collapsible and a 1953 9cm Elmar. It had a brand new shutter and rangefinder and I loved it - but it was my only camera and not flexible enough. Perhaps, these days, I could live with the limitations. I love the idea of the M-D but it will never be.

 

The 20mm f2.8 is an excellent suggestion and I did see one for sale recently. Perhaps I'll see if it's still available...



#13
NickOn

NickOn

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUK, Devon

Just to side-track the 105 debate, can anyone suggest a competent but mid-range price zoom from the higher end of wide-angle, through 50mm to a tele of less than 200mm?  Something that can sit on the camera (D610)?



#14
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,573 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The 24-85 is much better than it's price suggests, the current 24-120 is an even nicer walkaround zoom but more expensive and heavier. A good sample of the Sigma 24-105 is the sharpest in that range but there is some sample variation.

 

If you want a superzoom, Nikon's own 28-200 is among the better for FX use.



#15
Dogbytes

Dogbytes

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationCornwall

Just to side-track the 105 debate, can anyone suggest a competent but mid-range price zoom from the higher end of wide-angle, through 50mm to a tele of less than 200mm?  Something that can sit on the camera (D610)?

 

Earlier this year I had, as one of my temporary lenses, an AF Nikkor 28-200 f3.5-5.6 D. As Peter said a surprisingly decent lens and can be had for about £100 give or take. there is a newer version than the 'D' that I had, I think the main advantage of the newer one is that it focusses closer.



#16
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,573 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

The G version of the 28-200 has a 62 mm non-rotating filter mount rather than the earlier 72 mm rotating. The aperture blades are rounded in the later version and it is 160 grams less to carry around.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: lens, recommendations, nikkor