Question:
Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible… Ah, I’m just tired of this. Thanks a lot. Edge’s Home Page http://www.geocities.com/the_edge
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible… Ah, I’m just tired of this. Thanks a lot. Edge’s Home Page http://www.geocities.com/the_edge
First off, $350 is not a good price, at least within the US. B&H has them new at $250 and you can easily buy them used for $150 or so. If you stay interested in this lens, I would check around more on prices. The 35-70 3.3-4.5 first came out in the mid-eighties and was a popular consumer grade lens. Lots of people bought one with an FG or an N2000. It has a close-up mode that will get you down at about a foot at 70mm – this equates to 1:4.4. That’s a useful feature. It’s sharpness and freedom from distortion are very good and probably a bit above average. It’s one of the smallest zoom lenses Nikon ever made, so if light weight and compact size are important to you, it’s a good choice. In my mind, the primary downside is its limited zoom range. Most people prefer zooms to have a bit more on the top end, perhaps up to 105mm. Alternately, they like an extended wide angle range down to 28mm. Both those are other people and your preferences are what counts. Think of it as a 50mm lens with an ability to go slighlty wider or slightly longer and you’ll get a feel for what it does. If you like 50mm lenses, you’ll probably like it. Since you’re looking at an AIS lens, it sounds like you have a non-AF camera. The only real downside to its speed is that you’ll have a touch of rangefinder blackout at the 70mm end (unless you have an FG or N2000 – those have a different kind of focusing screen that blacks out closer to 5.6). There will be some times that it’s not fast enough with ISO 100 film, but 400 speed film is so good, you can just switch to it. One thing about it that I don’t care for is that it’s two touch zoom – separate zoom and focus rings. Having them separate doesn’t really bother me, but there’s another fall-out that does – no depth of field scale. I use these a lot with manual focus cameras and would really miss it. Super compact zooms are pretty handy and fun. I have a not so common 28mm-50mm Nikkor that I really like. It’s similarly small, very sharp, and centered around my favorite lens – the 35mm focal length. I can go hiking with it on a compact, lightweight manual body and cover most of my needs. Add a 105mm macro, and I’m completely set. It has a depth of field scale (!) and only cost me $115 (a real steal). Rick
Response:
You can buy the AF version of this lens used on eBay all day long for $60
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible… Ah, I’m just tired of this. Thanks a lot. Edge’s Home Page http://www.geocities.com/the_edge
Response:
Ivan, FWIW, I’d try and find one of the 35-70 f3.5 AIS zooms. It’s no longer in production but it was/is an outstanding zoom lens. You do see them from time to time on Ebay and KEH usually has one or two in stock as well. This is the version that has the fixed maximum aperture of f3.5 not the newer variable max aperture model.
Response:
Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible…
If you can find one, try the Nikon Series E 36-72mm f/3.5, long unavailable new and rarely available used. It is an exceptional lens with a constant f/3.5 maximum aperture, very compact using the 52mm filter thread. I have owned the 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 AIS and it was a very good lens, but I believe the 36-72 to be even better. Unlike the Series E prime lenses the 36-72 zoom has metal construction and multi-coating. There is also a great metal hood, far removed from the rubber hoods that are offered for nearly all the Series E primes. Expect to pay $150-200 in EXC+ to MINT- condition. — Tony Polson, North Yorkshire, UK
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible… If you can find one, try the Nikon Series E 36-72mm f/3.5, long unavailable new and rarely available used. It is an exceptional lens with a constant f/3.5 maximum aperture, very compact using the 52mm filter thread. I have owned the 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 AIS and it was a very good lens, but I believe the 36-72 to be even better. Unlike the Series E prime lenses the 36-72 zoom has metal construction and multi-coating. There is also a great metal hood, far removed from the rubber hoods that are offered for nearly all the Series E primes. Expect to pay $150-200 in EXC+ to MINT- condition.
Oh come on! The Nikon System Handbook says the following of the 36-72 f/3.5 Series E: "Though a popular lens, it is not sharp throughout it’s zoom range, and the corners are not as sharp as the center. For other than critical use, it is an excellent lens." Now that’s what I call damned by faint praise. Not only that, he’d have to get rabbit ears added to it to use it with his meter. Either of the constant max f/stop, manual-focus-only 35-70 f/3.5 Nikkors would make a far better choice. If there’s any Series Zoom he should do this for, it’s the 75-150, *not* the 36-72. I wouldn’t pay $50 for a Mint 36-72. Mac
Response:
Just for a little more info. The 35-70/3.5 came in two versions, and AI and an AIS. You can tell which is which easily because the AI model has 72mm filter threads, while the AIS version has 62mm filter threads. Both are rather uncommon, although quite good optically. For use on a manual focus Nikon, either lens is easier to use than the 35-70/2.8 AF, and both of the MF lenses have a macro mode at the 70mm end, where it is most useful; rather than the silly 35mm end, as found on the AF lens. Should you desire, I have a clean 35-70/3.5 AIS lens, with proper hood, that I would sell for reasonable dollars (certainly less than the $350 you came up with for the variable aperture zoom, BTW, WAY too high a price). I used it on my FM2 for photography at wedding receptions, a job now taken by my N90s/35-70 AF combo. Although all of Nikon’s 35-70 constant aperture zooms are sharp, none will replace an inexpensive 50/1.8, either in speed or sharpness. Regards, David Glos – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible… If you can find one, try the Nikon Series E 36-72mm f/3.5, long unavailable new and rarely available used. It is an exceptional lens with a constant f/3.5 maximum aperture, very compact using the 52mm filter thread. I have owned the 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 AIS and it was a very good lens, but I believe the 36-72 to be even better. Unlike the Series E prime lenses the 36-72 zoom has metal construction and multi-coating. There is also a great metal hood, far removed from the rubber hoods that are offered for nearly all the Series E primes. Expect to pay $150-200 in EXC+ to MINT- condition. Oh come on! The Nikon System Handbook says the following of the 36-72 f/3.5 Series E: "Though a popular lens, it is not sharp throughout it’s zoom range, and the corners are not as sharp as the center. For other than critical use, it is an excellent lens." Now that’s what I call damned by faint praise. Not only that, he’d have to get rabbit ears added to it to use it with his meter. Either of the constant max f/stop, manual-focus-only 35-70 f/3.5 Nikkors would make a far better choice. If there’s any Series Zoom he should do this for, it’s the 75-150, *not* the 36-72. I wouldn’t pay $50 for a Mint 36-72. Mac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible… If you can find one, try the Nikon Series E 36-72mm f/3.5, long unavailable new and rarely available used. It is an exceptional lens with a constant f/3.5 maximum aperture, very compact using the 52mm filter thread. I have owned the 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 AIS and it was a very good lens, but I believe the 36-72 to be even better. Unlike the Series E prime lenses the 36-72 zoom has metal construction and multi-coating. There is also a great metal hood, far removed from the rubber hoods that are offered for nearly all the Series E primes. Expect to pay $150-200 in EXC+ to MINT- condition. Oh come on! The Nikon System Handbook says the following of the 36-72 f/3.5 Series E:
Oh come on yourself! Is that the only book on Nikons you ever read? Or your only source of information? Or are you just a badge snob? How sad. — Tony Polson, North Yorkshire, UK
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello again, After weeks of searching, I came to idea to buy zoom lens, instead of 1-2 wideangles and telephoto. The reason is obvious: very high price. At first I thought to buy Tamron 28-105 fixed f2.8, but the lens are massive (82mm), heavy and I don’t like their minimum focus distance. So I thought that Nikkor AIS 35-70 f3.3-4.5 would be great for me, as "do-everything" lens and its price is about 350$. BUT – is it producing a sharp and contrasty pictures? Fstop is 3.3-4.5, is that a problem for doing scenics and street with 100ASA film? Is that a problem at all? I would like to hear a short review (I can’t find it anywhere) of this lens. OR should I buy 1-2 used wideangle lenses and one used telephoto? Zoom just seems more flexible… If you can find one, try the Nikon Series E 36-72mm f/3.5, long unavailable new and rarely available used. It is an exceptional lens with a constant f/3.5 maximum aperture, very compact using the 52mm filter thread. I have owned the 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 AIS and it was a very good lens, but I believe the 36-72 to be even better. Unlike the Series E prime lenses the 36-72 zoom has metal construction and multi-coating. There is also a great metal hood, far removed from the rubber hoods that are offered for nearly all the Series E primes. Expect to pay $150-200 in EXC+ to MINT- condition. Oh come on! The Nikon System Handbook says the following of the 36-72 f/3.5 Series E: Oh come on yourself! Is that the only book on Nikons you ever read? Or your only source of information? Or are you just a badge snob? How sad.
The Nikon System Handbook has mirrored my personal experience with Nikons and Nikkors over the past 22 years (12 bodies and 25 lenses). Therefore, when it says: "Though a popular lens, it is not sharp throughout it’s zoom range, and the corners are not as sharp as the center. For other than critical use, it is an excellent lens.", I’m likely to believe it (until experience proves it otherwise). What’s sad is somebody recommending a 36-72 f/3.5 Series E to a guy with a 1974 non-AI F2. Mac
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.