Reading mode: Light Dark

18 -70 vs 28-105

Go to last post
G

Graham Edwards

Member
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
Am in process of buying Tokina 12-24 and was wondering about whether to follow up by trading my 18-70 Nikon kit lens for the nikon 28-105? Is there any significant quality difference between the two nikons or am I just trading focal length range and AF speed?
 
28-105

Plus: Many people love it. You wont get »better« pics than with your kit but the extra 35mm length are useful (and it does fun macros too).

Minus: Old design, no ED glass, no AF-S fast focussing

You may consider the AFS 24-85 too.

--

 
FWIW, I traded in my 28-105 for the 24-85 and I'm glad I did. The 24-85 is faster, quieter, smaller and sharper than the 28-105.

If you have an 80-200, 70-200 or 80-400, then you probably won't miss the extra range that the 28-105 would give you.
 
The 28-105 is quite a bit better optically that either 18-70 or 24-85 just doesn't have the new zip, it's a d lens-------ron s.
Graham Edwards said:
thanks! I hadn't considered the 24-85 but that would be perfect fit
and retain the AF speed of the 18-70! Optically would you say it is
the same/bit better or much better than the 18-70?
Click to expand...
--
seeing and being aware are not the same thing....
http://www.pbase.com/ron9ron
 
Have enclosed link to Photozone.. I like to read the review of individuals but they are just that "indidviduals" Photozone has a great way of having individual put in their experience with the lenses concerning every thing from flare, performance open/closed/ opticallyy etc. and coming in on a scale of 0-5
The 18-70,, kit has 90 imputs with a score of 2.55(average)
The 24-85, has 52 imputs with a score of 2.92(average)
The 28-105 has 135 imputs with a score of 3.42(good)

to give you a comparison the 17-55 is around 4.15, so the answer to you question is in the results of many imputs, not just editorials by individuals(though they may be helpful)--------ron s.

http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/surveyform.jsp?filter=%22brand= 'Nikkor'%20OR%20brand='Sigma%20AF'%20OR%20brand='Tamron%20AF'%20or%20brand='Tokina%20AF'%20or%20brand='Vivitar%20AF'%22&title='Nikkor'
Graham Edwards said:
thanks! I hadn't considered the 24-85 but that would be perfect fit
and retain the AF speed of the 18-70! Optically would you say it is
the same/bit better or much better than the 18-70?
Click to expand...
--
seeing and being aware are not the same thing....
http://www.pbase.com/ron9ron
 
thanks...those reviews are really useful...seems as though answer is that 18-70 and 24-85 are much the same in terms of quality so question will be where I want the overlap with the 12-24 and my 70-200 either 18-24 or 70 -85! Think I will await the arrival of the Tokina and then decide. Thanks for the help. Much appreciated.
 
Thanks thats helpful, I think I have ruled out the 28-105 on the basis of the AF speed - both 18-70 and 24-85 are given as "fast" while the 28-105 is "slow" and apparently hunts badly.

Don't know if the improvement (2.92 vs 2.55 using the photozone ratings) makes the switch to the 24-85 worthwhile..be interesting to know if anyone has compared the two side by side as the reviews on the two lenses are quite a way apart in terms of time...
 
IMO, another idea is to look beyond the specs and test results. Instead consider the type of lenses you may need. Tokina 12-24 would give you a classic 18-35 wide zoom range. Neither 24-85 nor 28-105 (which I had and sold) are wide enough (to me) to be used as a basic walk-around zoom (though, 24-85 is more usable) becasuse I don't want to mount 12-24 everytime I need a wide(ish) shot.

My 2 cents: Tokina and kit lens (which, btw, is not bad at all, qualitywise).
--
Roman
----------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/rkfoxman
 
yes, the 28-105 will hunt in low light and in macro mode because you are moving! But, come on...the normal range D lenses aren't much slower than the consumer AF-S lenses.

The 28-105 was a better lens than the 18-70 and 24-85 in my opinion. I had all 3 at different times. The 28-105 was by far the most useful lens. I never liked the color rendition of the other 2. And, the macro mode is quite useful.

at least give the 28-105 a test run.

Ian
--
http://www.ianz28.smugmug.com

 
I agree with Ian! The 28-105 does not hunt and has pretty snappy AF for a non-AF-S lens. There isn't that much difference between it and the 18-70, which I also own.

Optically it's really close, too. My 18-70 is damn good, but so is my 28-105. I couldn't pick a winner out of the two for sharpness. The 28-105 has less distortion and no vignetting because it's not DX, but a little more CA due to the absence of ED glass. Not a big issue, however!

For me, those lenses serve difference purposes on a DSLR:

18-70 - general walk-around with useful wide angle
28-105 - great for portraits & macros (has 1:2 macro mode!)

If I have my Tokina 12-24 with me I'm more inclined to take the 28-105 along, but I also don't like switching too much at the wide end. Touch choice, but I'd say the 18-70 is more widely applicable... I'd say try the both :)

Cheers

Mike
ianz28 said:
yes, the 28-105 will hunt in low light and in macro mode because
you are moving! But, come on...the normal range D lenses aren't
much slower than the consumer AF-S lenses.

The 28-105 was a better lens than the 18-70 and 24-85 in my
opinion. I had all 3 at different times. The 28-105 was by far
the most useful lens. I never liked the color rendition of the
other 2. And, the macro mode is quite useful.

at least give the 28-105 a test run.

Ian
--
http://www.ianz28.smugmug.com

Click to expand...
 
Graham Edwards said:
Am in process of buying Tokina 12-24 and was wondering about
whether to follow up by trading my 18-70 Nikon kit lens for the
nikon 28-105? Is there any significant quality difference between
the two nikons or am I just trading focal length range and AF speed?
Click to expand...
I have both lenses, and my 28-105 has better edge sharpness than my 18-70. I haven't used many samples of either lens, so I don't know if this is generally true or only true of the two lenses I have. The 28-105 doesn't vignette at the wide end, which the 18-70 does. I use the macro feature (I'm sure not everyone will). I don't find the slightly slower focusing speed to be any big deal. I use teles more than wides, so I like the extra reach at the long end.

Where the 18-70 wins out is simply that it goes as wide as 18. 28 is not terribly wide on a 1.5x body (it's barely shorter than "normal"). What this really comes down to, IMO, is which you need more: 18 at the wide end or 105 at the long end.

--
Daniel Bell
 
I'll tag daniel here and say that I'm not here to tell you that you absolutely need this lens. Where I found it working wonderfully was in concert with a wide carrying it in my backpack or pocket. It is a fairly small lens and hardy. It is sharper than the kit and 24-85 and really not that much slower in focusing. How do I say this "it has maturity on it's side"---ron s.
Daniel Bell said:
Graham Edwards said:
Am in process of buying Tokina 12-24 and was wondering about
whether to follow up by trading my 18-70 Nikon kit lens for the
nikon 28-105? Is there any significant quality difference between
the two nikons or am I just trading focal length range and AF speed?
Click to expand...
I have both lenses, and my 28-105 has better edge sharpness than my
18-70. I haven't used many samples of either lens, so I don't know
if this is generally true or only true of the two lenses I have.
The 28-105 doesn't vignette at the wide end, which the 18-70 does.
I use the macro feature (I'm sure not everyone will). I don't find
the slightly slower focusing speed to be any big deal. I use teles
more than wides, so I like the extra reach at the long end.

Where the 18-70 wins out is simply that it goes as wide as 18. 28
is not terribly wide on a 1.5x body (it's barely shorter than
"normal"). What this really comes down to, IMO, is which you need
more: 18 at the wide end or 105 at the long end.

--
Daniel Bell
Click to expand...
--
seeing and being aware are not the same thing....
http://www.pbase.com/ron9ron
 
I use the 18-35 ED and the 28-105D on my D200. Simply fabulous, and I saved a chunk of change. Of course 90% of my images are outdoors.

Give the 28-105 a run.

--
'Willing to Work for Gear.'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top