Nikon 70-210 AFD

[Melvin J Bramley]

Is the Nikon 70-210 AFD really all that bad?
I am looking for an inexpensive short telephoto zoom lens for my Nikon F80.
What are my options?
For my manual cameras I like the range and optical quality of the Nikon 70-150 series E; nothing like it in AF.

 

[bdial]

Ken Rockwell seems to have liked it, at the time of his review. https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/7021056.htm

 

[mshchem]

Slow, also the push pull zooms get really loose as they age, no big deal on either account. These are nice as they'll work with any Nikon.

 

[mshchem]

F mount

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I have the 70-210 f4. It can have issues focusing in low contrast with some cameras. My F5 handles it pretty well. IQ is good. Manual focusing is a bit touchy as mechanism is loose and ring is narrow. For what I paid I'm happy with it.

 

[benveniste]

Is the Nikon 70-210 AFD really all that bad?
I am looking for an inexpensive short telephoto zoom lens for my Nikon F80.
What are my options?

The first question I'd ask myself is "am I willing to haul around an 80-200mm f/2.8D?" If so, then grab one, since at current prices they offer a great combination of price and performance.
The second question I'd ask myself is "do I need/want an aperture ring?" If no, consider a 70-300mm f/4.5~5.6G AFS-VR. IMO, it's better than all but one of the slower AF Nikkors telezooms, and especially for film, VR expands the shooting "envelope" considerably.

If you're still reading, the third question I'd ask is "how important is focus speed?" None of the alternatives are particularly fast, but the 70-210mm f/4~5.6D is noticeably faster than the non-D 70-210mm f/4, 75-300mm f/4.5~5.6, or the 70-180mm f/4.5~5.6D Micro.

While I owned a 70-300mm f/4~5.6D ED, I can't really recommend it.

For my manual cameras I like the range and optical quality of the Nikon 70-150 series E; nothing like it in AF.

The 75-150mm f/3.5E is a cult classic for good reason. For an AF alternative, though, consider a Tamron 35-150mm f/2.8-4 Di VC (Model A043). It's somewhat hard to find used, and at about $500 may not qualify as "inexpensive" to you, though. As a semi-serious suggestion, have you considered buying an F100 so you can more easily use your 75-150mm?

 

[Paul Howell]

Is the Nikon 70-210 AFD really all that bad?
I am looking for an inexpensive short telephoto zoom lens for my Nikon F80.
What are my options?
For my manual cameras I like the range and optical quality of the Nikon 70-150 series E; nothing like it in AF.

How important is AF with the F80, what do you shoot that needs AF? If you like the 70 to 150E use it on the F80.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

The first question I'd ask myself is "am I willing to haul around an 80-200mm f/2.8D?" If so, then grab one, since at current prices they offer a great combination of price and performance.
The second question I'd ask myself is "do I need/want an aperture ring?" If no, consider a 70-300mm f/4.5~5.6G AFS-VR. IMO, it's better than all but one of the slower AF Nikkors telezooms, and especially for film, VR expands the shooting "envelope" considerably.

If you're still reading, the third question I'd ask is "how important is focus speed?" None of the alternatives are particularly fast, but the 70-210mm f/4~5.6D is noticeably faster than the non-D 70-210mm f/4, 75-300mm f/4.5~5.6, or the 70-180mm f/4.5~5.6D Micro.

While I owned a 70-300mm f/4~5.6D ED, I can't really recommend it.


The 75-150mm f/3.5E is a cult classic for good reason. For an AF alternative, though, consider a Tamron 35-150mm f/2.8-4 Di VC (Model A043). It's somewhat hard to find used, and at about $500 may not qualify as "inexpensive" to you, though. As a semi-serious suggestion, have you considered buying an F100 so you can more easily use your 75-150mm?

Years ago I had a Nikon F100 and the Nikkor 70-210 F4.
The camera was the most unreliable Nikon I ever owned.
The 70-210 F4 was sharp but had very slow A/F and low contrast.
I sold off all my auto focus gear and went all manual again!
As I age I'm finding a cheap F80 with a 28-105 afd meets most of my needs, I just need a little more reach.

 

[miha]

How important is AF with the F80, what do you shoot that needs AF? If you like the 70 to 150E use it on the F80.

No metering with manual lenses on the F80, I'm afraid.

 

[miha]

As I age I'm finding a cheap F80 with a 28-105 afd meets most of my needs, I just need a little more reach.

What is your budget?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I like the Nikon 28mm to 200mm AF zoom lens better.

 

[Film-Niko]

Is the Nikon 70-210 AFD really all that bad?
I am looking for an inexpensive short telephoto zoom lens for my Nikon F80.
What are my options?
For my manual cameras I like the range and optical quality of the Nikon 70-150 series E; nothing like it in AF.

As you want the lens for the F80 (very capable camera), there is another option which has not been mentioned so far:
The Nikkor AF-S 70-200/f4 G ED VR

It is an excellent lens, indeed optically by far the best f4 Zoom for Nikon in that focal length range. And it is meanwhile astonishingly low priced on the used market (considering the former new price).

Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/4 G ED VR (FX) - Review / Test Report

Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/4 G ED VR (FX) Review

photozone.de

A friend of mine is using it, and he loves it.

 

[88E30M50]

I don't know the difference between the Nikkor 70-210 f4.0 and the D version, but the shot below was taken through a non-D 70-210 AF f4.0 mounted on an N75. I paid less than $10 for that lens and I've come to love it.

 

[hsandler]

I had a 70-210 AF-D for a few years. It was pretty good. Here's an example. The non-D version is the same optically but is geared with more turns per focus adjustment for precision rather than speed. You can decide which is more important to you. Pricing seems similar in Canada. I didn't find it had much zoom creep compared to, say, the manual focus 80-200 f4.5 AI.

Northern Cardinal Male by Howard Sandler, on Flickr

Since you are using an F80, you might look for a 70-300 VR, which I find to be better optically, even at 300mm and gives you the tremendous VR feature so useful for birds and wildlife without a tripod.

 

[Arthurwg]

The first question I'd ask myself is "am I willing to haul around an 80-200mm f/2.8D?" If so, then grab one, since at current prices they offer a great combination of price and performance.

I agree. The 80-200 is my choice. Built like a brick....castle.

 

[dynachrome]

I do not have the 70-210/4 but I have the 75-240, the one with the plastic mount. I haven't used it in a while but when I did, the results were good. It does not have VR. The most recent AF Nikkor I got in this range is the 70-180 Micro Nikkor. It is usable in the non-macro range, if a little slow. I agree that the 80-200/2.8 D is a great bargain at current prices but it's a lot to carry around. I think my next AF Nikkor telephoto will be one of the three versions of the 180/2.8. It will probably be the last one.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

I do not have the 70-210/4 but I have the 75-240, the one with the plastic mount. I haven't used it in a while but when I did, the results were good. It does not have VR. The most recent AF Nikkor I got in this range is the 70-180 Micro Nikkor. It is usable in the non-macro range, if a little slow. I agree that the 80-200/2.8 D is a great bargain at current prices but it's a lot to carry around. I think my next AF Nikkor telephoto will be one of the three versions of the 180/2.8. It will probably be the last one.

I had a Nikon 75-240 many years ago and it gave decent results.
I was scared off by the plastic mount which I expected to fail at every moment so I sold it.
How times have changed?
I have had and sold both MF and AF Nikon 180 f 2.8 in favour of zooms and regretted every moment!
The current Nikon 70-200, F4 AFS VR is said to out perform the 180 f 2.8!
Fantastic plastic has really come a long way.