Reading mode: Light Dark

Sharpest Aperture

Go to last post
George, I did some tests on my 28-105, and from 8-11 is where the pictures look the sharpest. The setting of 9.5 is the best for me.

I don't have the 17-35 yet (1 on order), but read in several reviews the setting of f/5.6 is the best for that lens. I am anxiously waiting for the lens to come. What do you think of yours?

Hope this helps. Ken
 
Ken said:
George, I did some tests on my 28-105, and from 8-11 is where the
pictures look the sharpest. The setting of 9.5 is the best for me.

I don't have the 17-35 yet (1 on order), but read in several
reviews the setting of f/5.6 is the best for that lens. I am
anxiously waiting for the lens to come. What do you think of yours?

Hope this helps. Ken
Click to expand...
I love it and I hate it !!

I don't know how to explain this to you in a way that will make any sense but here goes!

I'm new to photography and a year ago I came into a bit of money so I took the plunge and bought some expensive kit
S2 Pro
17-35 AF-S
SB 80 DX
Manfrotto 441 Tripod
28-105 D
Lots of software - Neatimage Pro, Photoshop 7, Qimage Pro
Canon S 900 etc.........
The list goes on

When I was first shopping for lenses I was told by the Shop salesman that I could not go wrong with the 17-35 AF-S so I bought it.

The first 17-35 was terrible - it was extremely soft below f/5.6 so I returned it for a new one which I have now. In my honest inexperianced opinion unless you really need a wide angle it's overpriced. It is nowhere near as sharp as the 28-105 which is less than a 1/4 the price.I've had my 17-35 checked by pros and they all say its wonderful but knowing what I do now I wouldn't pay the same price for the lens ie I was expecting more from the reviews I read.

On the otherhand I've taken some great shots with it but anything more than 5 meteres away looks slightly soft when zoomed into in photoshop.I don't know if it's the camera or the lens or something that I don't understand but now when it comes to the 28-105 there's another story which I must tell.

When I first asked about the 28-105 I was told it's a cheap average lens nowhere near a 28-70 AF-S. 60mm micro,105 micro,50mm 1.8 etc....

Let me tell you something I must have a freak lens because to my eyes there is very little diff between the 28-105 and any of the previous lenses when it comes to sharpness. For the price the 28-105 is AWSOME unless it's defective I could live with just this one lens.
If you don't already own one do yourself a favour and check one out!!!

I'm not saying that it's any better than a good prime or a 28-70 just that it's so close to these other more expensive lenses that it's too good to be true.

I compared it to all of the above at the camera shop where I tried them all and took home the pictures to compare and my tests say it's not worth the money to spend more on an AF-S lens unless you really need it for a specific purpose.

Having said all that I read in ken rockwells column( I think) that he went through several 17-35 lenses before finding a suitable one to keep for himself.
My advice is to test it for sharpness thoroughly before laying down your cash.

Good luck
 
George, I also like the 28-105mm. It is my favorite lens and my everyday lens as well.

You aren't making me feel too good. I just ordered the Nikon 17-35 f/2.8 on Friday and got an email from B&H Photo today stating it was on its way. I will try it out, and if it is like yours, I will send it back.

It seems most people just love the lens, but every once in a while someone gets a bummer lens. I have my fingers crossed.

Another lens that is getting high praise (I have one) is the 70-200 f/2.8 VR. It is a terrific lens if you need something in that range.

Take care Ken
 
George Vardas said:
What is the sharpest aperture for the following 2 lenses
nikkor 28-105 D
nikkor 17-35 AF-S
Click to expand...
Hi Geoge ,

Iam looling at the same lens 28-105 D or A 24Mmm-120mm VR Nikon. but before i do that i need to sort out my sharpness issue.
Images are sharp at 3-9ft but distant shots are not sharp at all .

Did you get your sharpness problem sorted out satifactory or are you still having some problems ?

Fuji have told me they can reprogram the camera so its sharpness pro forms better. so iam watching a few postings here on the forum to see how others have got on in sending there S2 in for simular sharpness issues.
All the best Jonathan Richardson U.K
 
Interesting conversation going on here. I could have done with reading it last Friday. I needed a wider zoom for the S2 and thought about the new 12-24, 17-35 and 18-35. I researched forums and reviews and found that quite a number thought that the 17-35 was not muich of an improvement over the 18-35. Many thought that, for the money, the 18-35 was the best buy. Then I decided to look at the more important aspect, how much money did I have in my pocket. The 12-24 is almost 900 UK pounds, the 17-35 a staggering 1200 Uk pounds. So I've had to go for the 18-35 for a third of the price. Marry in haste, repent at leisure? Who knows?
--
gibbsy
http://www.pbase.com/gibbsy
 
Gerwyn Gibbs said:
Interesting conversation going on here. I could have done with
reading it last Friday. I needed a wider zoom for the S2 and
thought about the new 12-24, 17-35 and 18-35. I researched forums
and reviews and found that quite a number thought that the 17-35
was not muich of an improvement over the 18-35. Many thought that,
for the money, the 18-35 was the best buy. Then I decided to look
at the more important aspect, how much money did I have in my
pocket. The 12-24 is almost 900 UK pounds, the 17-35 a staggering
1200 Uk pounds. So I've had to go for the 18-35 for a third of the
price. Marry in haste, repent at leisure? Who knows?
Click to expand...
Gerwyn will you let me know how you get on with that one .. also an S2 user here interested in wider angle .. widest at the moment is 28mm here.

--
Mark
 
Hi,

Here you go a Nikon 18-35 pic taken on S2 in raw and converted on EX using STD/STD/STD - no extra sharpening!. It´s a simple example of how it performs at medium apertures ... very nice IMHO ...
Warning! 1.24 Mb
http://www.pbase.com/image/18451826/original

Regards
Karl Schrader said:
Marry in haste, repent at leisure? Who knows?
Karl Schrader said:
--
gibbsy
http://www.pbase.com/gibbsy
Click to expand...
Hi Gerwyn
You certainly will not repent in having purchased the Nikkor 18-35
it is an excellent lens and very sharp when stopped down 1-2 stops
throughout its focal range when used with the S2
Karl
--
http://www.pbase.com/schrader
Click to expand...
--
Paulo Abreu, Fuji S2Pro - Nikon 18-35, 28-105, 80-200

'Buy a FujiFilm S2 Pro TODAY because ONE DAY you will be dead !'
http://www.pbase.com/psergio
 
That is pretty sharp. Did'nt realise what it was until the download had finished. It take it it is a ship doing a Titanic impression. I've spent all day in front of the PC sorting photos of dogs so tomorrow I'm off out to try out the 18-35 and I hope it's not to bright as I'm still waiting on a polariser. Thanks for the info.
--
gibbsy
http://www.pbase.com/gibbsy
 
Hi again,
Gerwyn Gibbs said:
That is pretty sharp. Did'nt realise what it was until the download
had finished. It take it it is a ship doing a Titanic impression.
I've spent all day in front of the PC sorting photos of dogs so
tomorrow I'm off out to try out the 18-35 and I hope it's not to
bright as I'm still waiting on a polariser. Thanks for the info.
Click to expand...
The polarizer is also good to deal with those "extra" highlights close to blow up. if you are working with good light, you may want to set "A" and choose the range of F8-11 for best resolution ... just a thought...
Btw, you will catch lots of dogs on a single pic with 18-35 :-)

Regards,
Gerwyn Gibbs said:
--
gibbsy
http://www.pbase.com/gibbsy
Click to expand...
--
Paulo Abreu, Fuji S2Pro - Nikon 18-35, 28-105, 80-200

'Buy a FujiFilm S2 Pro TODAY because ONE DAY you will be dead !'
http://www.pbase.com/psergio
 
Hi George,

Sorry for some replies on your thread and not giving you any feedback on your initial question. I have 28-105 but can´t tell you about its best aperture. Check this link: http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html

Regards,
George Vardas said:
Ken said:
George, I did some tests on my 28-105, and from 8-11 is where the
pictures look the sharpest. The setting of 9.5 is the best for me.

I don't have the 17-35 yet (1 on order), but read in several
reviews the setting of f/5.6 is the best for that lens. I am
anxiously waiting for the lens to come. What do you think of yours?

Hope this helps. Ken
Click to expand...
I love it and I hate it !!
I don't know how to explain this to you in a way that will make any
sense but here goes!
I'm new to photography and a year ago I came into a bit of money so
I took the plunge and bought some expensive kit
S2 Pro
17-35 AF-S
SB 80 DX
Manfrotto 441 Tripod
28-105 D
Lots of software - Neatimage Pro, Photoshop 7, Qimage Pro
Canon S 900 etc.........
The list goes on

When I was first shopping for lenses I was told by the Shop
salesman that I could not go wrong with the 17-35 AF-S so I bought
it.
The first 17-35 was terrible - it was extremely soft below f/5.6 so
I returned it for a new one which I have now. In my honest
inexperianced opinion unless you really need a wide angle it's
overpriced. It is nowhere near as sharp as the 28-105 which is less
than a 1/4 the price.I've had my 17-35 checked by pros and they all
say its wonderful but knowing what I do now I wouldn't pay the same
price for the lens ie I was expecting more from the reviews I read.
On the otherhand I've taken some great shots with it but anything
more than 5 meteres away looks slightly soft when zoomed into in
photoshop.I don't know if it's the camera or the lens or something
that I don't understand but now when it comes to the 28-105 there's
another story which I must tell.
When I first asked about the 28-105 I was told it's a cheap average
lens nowhere near a 28-70 AF-S. 60mm micro,105 micro,50mm 1.8
etc....
Let me tell you something I must have a freak lens because to my
eyes there is very little diff between the 28-105 and any of the
previous lenses when it comes to sharpness. For the price the
28-105 is AWSOME unless it's defective I could live with just this
one lens.
If you don't already own one do yourself a favour and check one out!!!
I'm not saying that it's any better than a good prime or a 28-70
just that it's so close to these other more expensive lenses that
it's too good to be true.
I compared it to all of the above at the camera shop where I tried
them all and took home the pictures to compare and my tests say
it's not worth the money to spend more on an AF-S lens unless you
really need it for a specific purpose.
Having said all that I read in ken rockwells column( I think) that
he went through several 17-35 lenses before finding a suitable one
to keep for himself.
My advice is to test it for sharpness thoroughly before laying down
your cash.

Good luck
Click to expand...
--
Paulo Abreu, Fuji S2Pro - Nikon 18-35, 28-105, 80-200

'Buy a FujiFilm S2 Pro TODAY because ONE DAY you will be dead !'
http://www.pbase.com/psergio
 
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