Nikon, Sigma, Tamron auto focus zooms - normal range (relative to DX format)
Tamron 17-50 2.8 (DX; no VR or motor)
What to do if you don´t have the funds for a Nikkor 17-55 2.8 and you still feel the need to have better glass than with the kit lenses 18-70 or 18-55? The Tamron 17-50 fill the gap for all "normal" people who don´t make a living out of photography. At a price of 350 Euro for the Tamron against 1400 Euro for the Nikkor the question is: Is the Nikkor more than 3x times better optically? I don´t know since I don´t own the big Nikkor, but I highly doubt it. The lens has a decent built quality but it is plastic from top to bottom. I find the built quality a little bit better than the 18-70 but not by much. It certainly does not claim to be a Nikkor 17-55 in this regard, but the built quality is still good enough. The lens is relatively compact and focuses quickly despite the lack of AF-S/HSM.
Optically the lens performs great. It is sharp even wide open, at f/4.0 it already reaches the peak level that holds up until f/11. At the wide end vignetting and CA can be observed, filed curvature is also in issue with this lens but easily mastered. This lens performs on the same level as some of my fix-focals do. From f/4 to f/11 I can not see a difference between the Tamron and my 35mm 2.0 Nikkor.
On important note for handling this lens: The focus throw is so short, that the lens sometimes does not refocus on subjects that are very close together and farther away than a metre. In tricky situations where you really want to be safe it is better to focus at something distant and then refocus. This may all sound a bit negative but the really superb optical performance in day-to-day shooting far outweigh these minor glitches and I really like this lens. This lens has a high sample variation and buying this lens in a reputable store is a must. When you get this lens check it for front/backfocus, soft sides and the ability to focus at infinity. If you have issues it is better to send it to Tamron for calibration. My lens refused to focus on anything farther than 15 metres (extremely visible at 50mm and f/2.8, focus on a house far away, trees in 15 metres distance were sharp, house was not). I decided to send the lens to Tamron instead of changing it through the retailer. It took them five weeks to get it back to me but they did a great job in calibrating this lens. Highly recommended lens with a few issues, but if you get a good copy it is hard to beat.
Samples (DX): 19mm f8 50mm f4 19mm f3,2 17mm f3,5 34mm f5,6
Nikon AF-S 28-70mm 2,8
The top lens in this focal range from 1999 to 2007 has found the way into many photographers bags. Total production around 130.000 lenses.
Perhaps the biggest problem of this lens is the size. You will not go unnoticed with this one mounted on the camera. I have received more (friendly and more often not so friendly) comments by strangers with this lens mounted than any other, including big tele lenses. I think that the big diameter coupled with the very impressive lens hood draws a kind of attraction that I learned not to like right away during the first weeks of use. Interestingly the successor 24-70 2,8 is not much shorter and only a few grams lighter, but is sill characterized as being smaller. This is only due to the slightly reduced diameter of the lens body, which leads to a more slender appearance. The lens conveys a feeling of very high built quality.
Optically the lens is almost faultless with two exception. The first one is flare and ghosting which has been reduced in the successor. The second one is purple fringing at wider apertures. Bright objects develop a blue glow around them, which is hard to correct even in PP. From 28mm to 40mm this problem is not very relevant and only seen at f/2,8 to f/3,2. From 40mm to 70mm the problem gets worse until you have to stop down to f/4 or f/4,5 at 70mm to get rid of the problem entirely. Sharpness is very good even wide open across the whole focal range, color and contrast are also very pleasing.
Nikon 28-70mm 3.5-4.5
A quite compact lens entirely made of plastic (except the lens mount) but with a feeling of quality. Stopped down to f/8 the performance is quite good, but I have the feeling that this lens is already at it's limit with a 10 MP DX-sensor. No extraordinary positive or negative aspects, but a solid performer. Shooting wide open in bright light is not recommended, the lens develops an internal veiling in these situations.
Image quality at f/8 has no flaws and color and contrast are very good. Up to 50mm even f/5,6 can be heartfully recommended.
Nikon AF 28-85mm 3,5-4,5
Price in Germany 1989: 749,- DM, one of the first AF lenses in 1986 with the same optical construction as the previous AI-S lens. More than 350.000 lenses produced until 1999.
A quite popular choice for a midrange walkaround zoom during the 90's. Performance is as you would expect from a walkaround zoom with no outstandig specifications. It produces good pictures and is sharp already stopped down 2/3rd of a stop across the zoom range. Overall image quality is a good average. I would recommend the smaller and cheaper 28-70mm 3,5-4,5 over it any time.
Nikon AF 35-70mm 2,8
A lens with a long history and production time. Introduced in 1987 and updated to AF-D specification in 1992 the lens remained for eighteen years in production until 2005 despite the 1999 introduced successor AF-S 28-70 2,8. It was popular during all theese years because it is smaller than the 28-70mm 2,8 and much cehaper. While the bigger brother costed 1900 Euro in Germany (2004), the 35-70mm sold for only 800 Euro. Introductory price was 1200 DM in 1987, clearout price in 2006 only 500 Euro. Total production around 570.000 units.
The 35-70mm is still very popular on the used market and that is mostly because you can achieve a picture quality that does not stand behind the newer 28-70mm or 24-70mm lenses. But this comes at a high risk: sample variaton. I am already on my second copy of the lens after my first (non-D) model performed obviously below standard. Originally I simply ignored the lens after the first bad experience but reading glowing reviews again and again I bought a second sample, a D-model. Optically the non-D and D-versions are the same and should perform identical. While the first sample was not sharp until f/4 on the wide and f/5,6 on the long end with lots of veilling the second lens is sharp even wide open. On the long end wide open performance declines a bit but is still satisfactory. The built quality is very solid with an all-metal construction. The push-pull operation may not be to everybodys liking as well as the rotating front lens during focus operation.
During the last year I read various reports that an inner lens group is known to unbound because of bad glue. In the result this lens element fogs up and pictures loose contrast. The issue is known and Nikon can replace the component for approximately 300 Euro.
I often read that the lens has a focus issue at shorter disances and I was able to confirm that with the fist (bad) lens but with the newer sample I can not see such an effect. The only optical problem of this lens is the tendency for flare and ghosting. When used on a DX camera a bigger hood than the smallish HB-1 may be of help. On DX I use either the screw-in HN-23 or a much bigger HB-15 which still works fine; for FX you need the recommended hood.
The lens offers high image quality when you get a good sample but I have the feeling that there are many bad copies out there. Buying this lens used is a risk.
Nikon AF-S DX 18-70 3.5-4.5
Kit lens introduced with the D70 DSLR. I worked with it for one year and sold it due to the lack of speed (aperture wise) and not-so-excellent performance below 24mm. Between 24mm and 70mm and an aperture of 5.6 or 8.0 this lens was fabulous. If you are looking for a "first lens" with your first Nikon DSLR, go for this lens. Then try to find out what your shooting style is and built your lens collection from this lens on as a starting point.
Sample (DX): 18mm f8