Nikon 70-210 f4.5-5.6 ais

REEM

A
REEM

  • 1
  • 0
  • 41
Kitahara Jinja

D
Kitahara Jinja

  • 3
  • 0
  • 51
Custom Cab

A
Custom Cab

  • 4
  • 1
  • 68
Table for four.

H
Table for four.

  • 11
  • 0
  • 116

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,603
Messages
2,761,738
Members
99,413
Latest member
hussein Alaskari
Recent bookmarks
0

BimmerJake

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2009
Messages
134
Location
Fairfax, VA
Format
Holga
I'm considering this as an addition for a trip to Shenandoah i'm taking in a couple of months. i'll be shooting outdoors in daylight or in the woods. i'll have a tripod.

does anyone have experience with this lense? is the aperture really limiting under these circumstances?

how are the optics?

thanks for your input.
 

PhotoJim

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,314
Location
Regina, SK, CA
Format
35mm
f/5.6 is pretty slow. Still, the f/5.6 lens you have with you is better than the f/2.8 lens that you have at home. With a tripod, it's less of an issue of course.

Depth of field control is still an issue - you have more ability to do that with an f/2.8 or f/4 lens.

I have three Nikon lenses in this range:

80-200/4.5 (AI-converted) - I picked this up cheaply based on its reputation of being a fantastic lens. Zoom lenses have improved since then but the lens isn't too bad. I'd call it average in quality. (I could have a below-par sample.)

70-210/4.5-5.6 AF - this is my "city" lens for when I don't want to carry a big lens and I'm very happy with it. The f/5.6 maximum aperture at the long end is a little limiting, but when you can live with that the results are very good.

80-200/2.8 ED AF - amazing, but big and heavy.

I don't know how good the AI-S lens you're mentioning, but the AF version is certainly excellent.

If I were going to get a manual-focus lens in this range, I'd give serious thought to the 80-200/4 AI or AI-S. It's still inexpensive but it has a great reputation.
 
OP
OP

BimmerJake

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2009
Messages
134
Location
Fairfax, VA
Format
Holga
the 80-200 is a little more than double the 70-210 i was looking at. not out of the question, but that's really just one more stop isn't it? i'm not sure that's worth double.
 

PhotoJim

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,314
Location
Regina, SK, CA
Format
35mm
Well, if it is worth double, you'll soon know.

I can tell you that f/4 versus f/5.6 at 200mm is a big difference, because of the need for fast shutter speeds at that length (if you're handholding anyway). Whether that justifies the dollar difference is a question only you can ask.

I can tell you that I like my 70-210 a lot despite its slow speed. Even if you do get a faster lens, you might appreciate this lens' small size and weight and want to keep both.
 

fotch

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
4,774
Location
SE WI- USA
Format
Multi Format
I have the Nikon 70-210 f4.5-5.6 ais, purchase it new years ago. Excellent lens. I have not used it for years because I prefer primes. Also, I have some zooms that are shorter and smaller that I sometimes use. The 70-210 f4.5 needs lots of light (need to use faster shutter speeds) or faster film, or a tripod. YMMV
 

Pumal

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2009
Messages
580
Format
Multi Format
I have both lenses. I prefer the 70-210. Very light and sharp.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom