Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 22, 2003, 3:38 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 21
Default 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S vs. 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D AF

can someone explain to me the difference between these two lenses?

I know the one is around $1500 and the 18-35 is $500. why the huge descrepancy in price? I am looking for a wide angle I could use with my Nikon F100 and Fuji S2 PRO to take some wide angle protrait shots.

Will I be able to use all the features on the lenses with each camera?

thanks,
peter
ultraman is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 29, 2003, 10:48 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
marokero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 769
Default

The discrepancy comes in the form of ED lens elements for greater clarity and acuracy of color, a faster and constant aperture (f/2.8 vs f/3.5-4.5) throughout the focal ranges, a silent wave motor to snap the lens into focus faster than you can say AUTO in auto-focus, the ability to over-ride the autofocus at will should the lens not focus exactly where you wanted (just turn the focus ring, no time wasted flipping the AF/MF switch). Is it worth that much money? To some it is

Oh yeah, one more thing. On the F100 the lenses will focus faster than in the S2. That's because of the autofocus module in the F100 and F5 is the CAM 1300, as opposed to the CAM 900 used in the S2/D100/N80. CAM 1300 has three cross type sensors along the horizontal, while CAM 900 only has the center as cross type. You should be able to use all functions of either lens in both cameras without problems.
marokero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 4:56 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 21
Default

damn, al...you are the man, that's just the information I was looking for.

thanks,
peter

any thoughts on the 80-200 AFS vs the 80-200 AF? does the same concepts apply to these lenses?
ultraman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 11:00 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
marokero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 769
Default

Although I've never had the 80-200 AF-S in hand, I'm told it is quite a nice lens. I used to use the 80-200 (non-AF-S) at work, and it's pretty good, but once you've been bitten by the AF-S bug, I guess you can't look back at non AF-S the same way I believe the two lenses differ slightly in quality and construction (eventhough both have constant apertures and the same focal length range), the AF-S version being a bit sharper, and less prone to chromatic aberration due to the 5 ED elements (compared to the 3 on the non AF-S). The AF-S lens is heavier, but the extra weight adds the conveniences of autofocus over-ride, as I mentioned before, a focus lock button (that maintains focus on determined distance while you re-compose and or re-meter at a different subject), and of course, the silent wave motor that makes AF literally snap in place silently. The 80-200 AF-S has been discontinued and replaced by the 70-200 AF-S VR which by its name includes vibration reduction technology. If you are lucky you may yet find a used 80-200 AF-S in good condition, since the 70-200 is more expensive. If the expense is not an issue, I think the 70-200 is the better choice. I've hand held my old 75-300 Sigma lens at its equivalent 200mm, and compared to the 70-200 at its maximum, and the VR is really wonderful! I've been able to get relatively sharp images even at 1/5 of a second! Your milage may vary, but I've been very happy with the 70-200 so far.
marokero is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:10 PM.