# My newest Nikon lens has shipped



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Can hardly wait to get it, It's a Nikon-Nikkor AF 70-210mm D f/4-5.6 lens

This'll be just the lens I've been waiting for to do the work I want.

I know, It's an old lens, But it's super fast and sharp,
I couldn't resist buying it when I saw it for $199. marked down from $330. with an 8+ rating.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






Ken Rockwell's review

(Wish I had a lot of money, I'd pay this guy tons of money for his advice, He's brilliant)
.
.
.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Holy crap Dave, you're on a major buying spree...

You should have gone for:

Nikor 14mm-24mm ƒ2.8

Nikor 24mm-70mm ƒ2.8

Nikor 70mm-200mm ƒ2.8 VR II

Cover all the bases, just take out a 2nd mortgage... LOL

Oh, and about Rockwell, this is from his own site in his own words:



> This website is my way of giving back to our community. It is a work of fiction, entirely the product of my own imagination. This website is my personal opinion. To use words of Ansel Adams on page 193 of his autobiography, this site is my "aggressive personal opinion," and not a "logical presentation of fact."


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

kps said:


> Holy crap Dave, you're on a major buying spree...
> 
> You should have gone for:
> 
> ...





> This website is my way of giving back to our community. It is a work of fiction, entirely the product of my own imagination. This website is my personal opinion. To use words of Ansel Adams on page 193 of his autobiography, this site is my "aggressive personal opinion," and not a "logical presentation of fact."


LOL...

But seriously, I wished I could afford all those 2.8 lenses,
But, My lowly starving artist budget dictates to buy the cheapest I can afford,
Hopefully by doing so I can output images that I can actually sell.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

When I think about it, My choices of lenses aren't too bad.

-18mm-55mm 1.8 G
-50mm f/1.8 D
-28mm-70mm f/3.5-4.5 D
-70mm-210mm f/4-5.6 D

That looks like the perfect kit to me.

Although, I'll probably never use the 18-55mm lens, I detest plastic mount lenses,
But...We'll see, Nice to know only one of my lenses is disposable.


----------



## Todd (Oct 14, 2002)

Certainly, one of the advantages of the Nikon F mount is the ability to use quality lenses from decades past on current bodies.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Todd said:


> Certainly, one of the advantages of the Nikon F mount is the ability to use quality lenses from decades past on current bodies.


I just got it today, But it didn't come with a front lens cap or a rear cap,
I did get the 62mm filter for it though, But I still need at least a front lens cap for it.

I contacted Henry's customer service and they are going to send me the items free asap.

Such great service

Took a few shots with the new lens, I love it.

Dave


----------



## yeeeha (Feb 16, 2007)

This is a decent lens. AF isn't as fast as a modern lens of similar focal length range. Autofocusing is noisy too, particularly when the lens hunts for focus. The biggest drawback of the lens is its weight. Built like a tank with an all metal construct.

A little more than a year ago I wanted a lens that could reach 300mm, one that wouldn't cost a fortune and weigh a ton. The relatively new Tamron SP70-300mm lens received rave reviews. I got one and gave it a try. Three days later I returned the Tamron lens for a full refund. I wasn't satisfied with the image quality comparing to the Nikkor 70-210mm lens. See the attached comparison images, neither of which received any image processing. I took the two test images one minute apart, with the D90 mounted my Manfrotto tripod.

While I haven't given up on one day getting a good lens that extends to 300mm, for the time being I keep shooting the Nikkor lens.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Yea, It's not a bad lens, I think I'll be using it quite a lot.
Just noticed that it didn't come with the Nikon aluminum lens hood either,
Oh well, Found someone on ebay that has the "original brand new" 62mm Nikon HN-24 hood for $9.95 + $5.95 shipped to Canada.


----------



## yeeeha (Feb 16, 2007)

Lawrence said:


> Just noticed that it didn't come with the Nikon aluminum lens hood either


The lens hood is a screw in type. But with the lens hood attached, there is no way to put the lens cap on the lens at the same time. I finally gave up on the metal lens hood and bought a rubber lens hood a year ago. The rubber lens hood stays on the lens all the time and the lens cap can go on the lens too.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

yeeeha said:


> The lens hood is a screw in type. But with the lens hood attached, there is no way to put the lens cap on the lens at the same time. I finally gave up on the metal lens hood and bought a rubber lens hood a year ago. The rubber lens hood stays on the lens all the time and the lens cap can go on the lens too.


I've used rubber hoods before, But hated them because they stick to the sides of my
camera holster case when I'm in a hurry and want to put the camera away quickly.

But you are right the rubber hoods are better for the lens cap problem.
I'll have to give the metal hood a serious looking over for a solution,
Maybe a different lens cap design would alleviate the problem.

I have seen two different lens cap designs,
One has the release clips close to the edges of the cap,
While the second kind has the release clips more internal on the lens cap.


----------



## yeeeha (Feb 16, 2007)

Lawrence said:


> I have seen two different lens cap designs,
> One has the release clips close to the edges of the cap


That is the original lens cap for the Nikkor 70-210mm lens.


----------



## chrisburke (May 11, 2010)

I rarely use a lens cap... The lens hood will protect your lens... A photog friend of mine use to say "the difference between a million dollar pic and a crap pic coud be the 3 seconds it takes to get the lens cap off"...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## absolutetotalgeek (Sep 18, 2005)

Lens caps are for transport, walking around with it on the lens is the best way to miss those shots you wish you could get. And of course it's just funny to see people pull the camera up to shoot with it on and they make that face..


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

absolutetotalgeek said:


> Lens caps are for transport, walking around with it on the lens is the best way to miss those shots you wish you could get. And of course it's just funny to see people pull the camera up to shoot with it on and they make that face..


In any case, I'll still need the lens cap for when I change lenses,
This is the only 62mm lens in my bag, All my other lenses are 52mm.

Customer service at Henry's was surprised when I mentioned the lens shipped without caps.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

kps said:


> Holy crap Dave, you're on a major buying spree...
> 
> You should have gone for:
> 
> ...


I would remove the 14mm-24mm and put in a solid 50mm 1.8 like he has. Much more useful walking around lens. the other 2 you listed I want. :love2: Also I will keep my 105mm macro

To me the pictures taken with a 14mm-24mm just have this curve look to them, just odd, almost like a fisheye lens.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Joker Eh said:


> I would remove the 14mm-24mm and put in a solid 50mm 1.8 like he has. Much more useful walking around lens. the other 2 you listed I want. :love2: Also I will keep my 105mm macro
> 
> To me the pictures taken with a 14mm-24mm just have this curve look to them, just odd, almost like a fisheye lens.


It was a tongue-in-cheek recommendation, as you end up with 14mm -->200mm ƒ2,8 across the whole range. Kind of a play on a possible single lens which currently does not exist. 

But, if we're talking primes, a 50mm pretty much is (or should be) in everybody's bag. However, I think a 35mm ƒ1.4 would be a better choice...especially with a crop sensor camera. With an FX camera, the 35mm is the king of the "walk around" and street shooter lenses.


----------



## absolutetotalgeek (Sep 18, 2005)

> Customer service at Henry's was surprised when I mentioned the lens shipped without caps.


uh huh, Henry's is often surprised by lots of things (_not a fan of them_)


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

kps said:


> It was a tongue-in-cheek recommendation, as you end up with 14mm -->200mm ƒ2,8 across the whole range. Kind of a play on a possible single lens which currently does not exist.
> 
> But, if we're talking primes, a 50mm pretty much is (or should be) in everybody's bag. *However, I think a 35mm ƒ1.4 would be a better choice...especially with a crop sensor camera. With an FX camera, the 35mm is the king of the "walk around" and street shooter lenses*.


Yep a 35 is good as well. And would be the dedicated landscape lens for me.


----------

