Nikon and Canon Lense question

That is an oversimplification for sure. Nikon has and still does produce some pretty bad lenses. They also produce some of the best. In the 35mm days, the great Nikkors were made from metal instead of plastic and were called ED (same as Canon's L - low dispersion glass.) Most of them had a black wrinkle paint job on them.

Today it is more complicated because most of the lenses are made from plastic and ED isn't always used to designate the better products. An example is my 17-55 f2.8 zoom which is plastic, not ED and is still a very good performer. Generally speaking, if you spend around $1000 or more on a Nikkor you are getting an outstanding lens - There are a few exceptions but very few. As an example the 18-200 zoom is around $1000 - maybe a little less - but, like any 10X zoom, has some issues. Here, you are paying for VR and extreme zoom range, not image quality. It is pricey but not a great Nikkor. But for the most part, it's pretty hard to find a bad Nikkor in this price range.

Under $1000 You might be getting a great lens - certainly the single focal length lenses under $1000 are uniformly excellent. Some, like the 18mm f2.8, 85mm f1.4, 180mm f2.8 are famous for being outstanding Nikkors. Sorry, the 180 has the ED designation, now that I think about it. I guess these aren't much under $1000 either for that matter.

Some Nikkors are just plain unbelievable in terms of image quality. The aforementioned 18 and 180 lenses are examples. So are the 300 f2.8 ED, the 80-200 f2.8 AF ED zoom and others.

Some are outstanding but affordable. Examples are the 24 f2.8, 35 f2, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.8, 105 f2.5 (pre AF but still one of the best.)

Some, unfortunately are average to poor. The consumer grade zooms are the perfect example. Nikon doesn't make any great zooms for much less than $1000 down to perhaps $800. When you spend $150 for Nikkor zoom you are getting an OEM lens made for Nikon in China as a price impression product. You would do better to buy a Sigma, Tamron etc.

Ask any Nikon pro about your choice of Nikkor lenses. They all have the lowdown and share this information with each other.
What about the $500 35-70 f/2.8? It's an old-school push pull mechanical focusing zoom with no ED elements, but it's just as sharp as my 80-200 f/2.8 ED.
 
What about the $500 35-70 f/2.8? It's an old-school push pull mechanical focusing zoom with no ED elements, but it's just as sharp as my 80-200 f/2.8 ED.

I agree. It is one of Nikon's best zooms. It is a classic. I can only think of a couple of 2X zooms that were bad. One was the 43-86 push pull zoom and the other was the 24-50. Both of these were "consumer" zooms and not what makes Nikon proud. I wondered how long it would take for someone to find the exceptions. ;)
 

Most reactions

Back
Top