Picking Decent Stop-gap Zoom Lenses

[Peter Corbett]

I heard the AF-S 80-200 is better than the current 80-200, but I'm more than happy with the images, and it's a lot lighter too. Personally I would use Zeiss Contax if they would fit the F3, but they never made any fast zooms.

I'm wary about buying some used zooms on eBay. You just never can sure how much mechanical (AF and zoom) they had had in their life.

The next new lens I will get is the 17-35.

[Michael Power]

Hi Peter

Curious to know how the Nikon 80-400 worked out?

There seems to be an incredible range of lens options for this camera and I'm trying to think in terms of a basic set of zooms to give me the same lens length range as my EX with and without my Letus adapter. Wish Sony would get moving and bring out the long lens shown at NAB though the mooted price tag is almost the price of the camera.

[Leonard Levy]

I did try out a Nikon 24-70 the other day at a rentalhouse and didn't like the fact that the front element moved forward so much when changing zoom . Not matte box friendly. Also I prefer parfovcal lenses as they are much faster to use for B roll.

[Peter Corbett]

The 80-400 is very sharp (at least on HD video). It extends quite a way so no mattebox, but it comes with a very good shady sun hood. The main issue is when the lens is extended past 300mm and especially at 400mm. There is a bit of rattle or movement that results in an image shift when pulling focus. It's not so bad with moving subjects though. I still like and use the lens. It's lighter than the 80-200 and what else is there that's sharp and with the range?

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Leonard Levy

I did try out a Nikon 24-70 the other day at a rentalhouse and didn't like the fact that the front element moved forward so much when changing zoom . Not matte box friendly. Also I prefer parfovcal lenses as they are much faster to use for B roll.

The Nikon 24-70 f2.8 is Parfocal.

Here is a list of PARFOCAL lenses: (from lensrentals.com)

* Tokina: 11-16mm f/2.8
* Canon: 17-40 f/4 , 16-35 f/2.8 , 70-200 f/2.8 Non-IS
* Nikon: 17-35 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8 AF-S , 70-200/2.8 VR Mark I (not the Mark II)
* Micro 4/3: Panasonic 7-14 f/4
* Standard 4/3: Olympus 11-22 f/2.8-3.5

[Leonard Levy]

Thanks,
I couldn't tell for sure when I tested it. It seemed a little off but I was using a cheap nikon to canon adapter on my T2i and that could have thrown it off. Too bad - it makes my firm decision to stick with the 28-70 a little shakier though I still didn't like the front element movement.

[Peter Corbett]

I've just bough a 28-70. The front element only comes out a bit. many of these lenses do...even the great 35-70. I just found the Tokina equivalent a little soft with low contrast. I think the 28-70 will be a great workhorse.

[Steven S. Miric]

I just received my "long zoom": It's Nikon Nikkor 50-300/4.5 ED. Big piece of glass, parafocal and very solid. I got it off eBay from HK, for 1K (no duties in Canada!!). Initial tests are great, as other Nikkors I use...
Just another old glass to be considered...

[Charles Papert]

My friendly UPS man just dropped off a new and hard-to-get Tokina 16-28, the first in their new full-frame FX series which will presumably include updates of the 28-80 and 80-200 (both of which I have and are serviceable but not great). This looks like a winner, and has the hard stops in manual focus mode which I need.

[Peter Corbett]

Ehhh....but's it's a G lens; no manual F-stops. The Tokina 11-16 drives me nuts but I love the pictures. Considering getting a Duclos 11-16, but they are $3.5K