|
|||||
|
Home >> Photography >> Film Equipment Nikon
24-85mm f3.5-4.5D AF-S
This is, to date, Nikon’s smallest and cheapest Silent Wave Motor lens and one that has received good reviews since its introduction a couple of years back. List price is CAN $650 with street price in the $550 to $600 range – if you pay more than this before taxes, you’re contributing to your store owner’s kids’ education fund. $600 is a far cry from the $2250 asked for the 28-70mm f2.8 AF-S lens and the smallish 24-85 lens is quite a bit shorter and lighter than the massive pro lens; however, the small lens has decent heft that seems to belie its diminutive stature. The heft is also contrary to the majority plastic build of the lens, so there must be some good stuff inside to make up for it, most likely the Silent Wave Motor. The heft is also likely due to the lens being a bit bigger than most other Nikon lenses that would be in the same class. The 24-85 lens has a 67mm filter diameter size, which has annoyed a lot of people because it falls in between the Nikon standard of 62mm or 77mm filter sizes. And certainly, I would have been a bit happier if the lens were 62mm instead, but no matter, since I already had a 67-77 step-up ring for use with my Bronica lenses that also have 67mm filter sizes. It ain’t no big deal to buy a $10 ring to use existing 77mm filters, but for those that do not have the big filters, like Bill Clinton, I feel your pain. I bought this lens because I already blew the budget on the 70-200 VR lens and had little left over for the coveted 28-70 f2.8 lens. Up to now, I had been making do with the excellent, but elderly 35-70 f2.8 lens that has been my standby since 1997. There was a time when I used this one lens to cover 90 percent of a wedding shoot and until recently, it probably still covered about 50-60 percent of a wedding shoot, but as my evolution as a part time wedding photographer progressed, so too did my equipment needs. No one has ever complained about the technical quality of my photos taken with the 35-70 lens and even now, I’m certain it could hold its own nicely against the twice as expensive 28-70 AF-S lens. And despite the lens being used prominently for much of a wedding, I felt the need for a lens that could go wider at the short end, so that I could avoid having to switch lenses too much during a shoot. The long end of the 35-70 lens is okay and I would have been happy with a 24-70 lens since the 70-200 lens already covers that long end, but not that I’m going to give back the extra reach at the long end of the 24-85 lens. One annoyance I have with certain lenses in general is the use of variable apertures. What uselessness to have a maximum aperture of f3.5 to f4.5 for certain Nikkors. Why could Nikon not have made those lenses a constant f4 aperture lens? Would the cost have been that much more to do so? Perhaps, since to me, these variable aperture lenses are effectively f4 or 5.6 and I would have paid a little extra to have a constant f4, but then Nikon probably wanted to keep this lens affordable for the target group of F80 camera users. I can live with a slower lens in the wide to normal range since I generally want more depth of field down at 24mm and if I’m really wanting shallower DOF at the long end, I can use the 70-200, as I usually carry two cameras with me for most weddings. Being able to go down to 24mm on demand is deliciously addictive, so much so that the 28-70 AF-S lens seemed less desirable as before, but more on this later. It helps immensely to be able to alter perspective so easily and the quality seems good. However, since most of my use with this lens has been to shoot with negative films, this is obviously not the last word of how good the lens can be from viewing proof prints. The 4x6 prints look very good though and since few of those shots will see the light of day beyond this basic size, I’m happy with the results being produced. If there is an expectation for enlargements, I would use medium format instead of 35mm. The lens is very quiet in focusing thanks to the Silent Wave Motor, more so than the big 70-200 lens, as there are far fewer elements to move back and forth. It is a nice change over from the days of the 35-70 lens emitting a zzz’d-zzz’d sound, which at least confirmed the lens was focusing, but when shooting the 24-85 lens at wide angles where focusing from near to far requires very little movement, I’ve wondered if the lens has done anything, such is the silence of AF-S, and don’t worry, the lens works perfectly.
The lens hood does not attach directly to the front of the lens, as it does for Nikon lenses. Instead, the Canon hood attaches to the front of the main barrel and the hood is deep enough to effectively cover the 70mm end. When zooming out to 24mm or 28mm, the Canon lenses extend out an inch or so and that reduces the effective length of the stationary lens hood, so that no matter which focal length you are at with the lens, the hood is always at its most effective length. Very spiffy design and kudos to Canon for it. Another nice Canon touch is the flock or velvet-like material inside the hoods of their L zoom lenses to minimize flare, although it does appear to be a lint magnet. Another potential irk for longtime Nikon users is the reversed location for the zoom and focus rings. Traditionally, the focus ring has been at front and the zoom ring at the rear and certainly it does take a few uses to get use to it, but for me it actually makes life a bit easier. As much as I’ve commented negatively about a Newton flash bracket I purchased last year the thought of having this expensive accessory sit idly by did not sit well with me and I’ve used it for almost every wedding I’ve participated in this year. (One of my new grouses about the bracket are the sharp edges and corners that can cut you open if you’re grabbing for it too quickly – speaking from experience) The nature of the Newton bracket requires a different way of holding and supporting the lens with the left hand and it works better to have the zoom ring up front then at back. So for me, this change by Nikon works well although it did take a few uses to not automatically reach back to zoom. With the 24-85 and 70-200 lenses, I have two lenses on two cameras that can cover me for almost all of a wedding and in some case, for all of a wedding (although I’m favoring working with three cameras nowadays). The fact that both are AF-S lenses provides consistency and the zoom ring to go wide or long turn in the same direction. The primary benefit of Silent Wave lenses is to be able to manually override auto-focus whenever you wish, but for me, I love it because I can grab the cameras on the run or grasp onto the barrels without worrying about stripping the little screw, as I would with the older lenses because I have rarely overrode the focus the F100 cameras give me. I like the potential that the 24-85 lens has as a harbinger for Nikon to produce more good lenses at reasonable prices and provide the benefits of Silent Wave to a larger number of photographers who cannot afford the professional f2.8 lenses. As with many other Nikon users, I would love to see more Silent Wave and VR lenses being introduced at various price points, so that we may all enjoy the fruits of such technology. The next lens that should be updated to affordable AF-S class, IMNSHO, is the 18-35 lens that I currently own. The focal length provided by the lens is fine by me although I would certainly be happy to see it go to 16 or 17mm, but more importantly, give me a Silent Wave Motor in this baby and make it a constant f4 lens. Essentially, give me the full frame version of the 12-24mm DX lens and price it at under CAN $1500 and I would be quite happy to put aside my sinful desire for the 17-35 AF-S lens. My
Pitiful Technical Analysis
Over all, the 24-85 lens provided better performance than the 18-35mm lens, which itself has garnered some praise as being a very good performer for the money. However, the budget nature of the 24-85 lens reveals itself when compared to higher price lenses such as the 35-70 and 70-200. The tests revealed that the 35-70 lens, despite being many years older in design and lacking the ED element of the 24-85 lens, can still hold its own against newer designs. It is not until f8 and f11 that the 24-85 lens can match the performance of the 35-70. At 24mm, there is noticeable barrel distortion and at 85mm there is slight pincushion distortion. Not a lens for critical architectural photography. Chromatic abberation is also detected at the wide-angle focal lengths of the lens. Conclusion Almost all have some compromises compared to the large and expensive professional grade lenses and it is a matter of which lens appeals to the compromises you’re willing to live with. For me, I wanted AF-S and VR if possible and when the updated 24-120 AF-S VR was announced, I thought it was going to be nearly perfect for me to use as a candid lens. However, various reports indicate some good samples, but potentially some bad ones floating about and this early in the game, I thought it best to wait out any quality control issues Nikon may have with the VR lens. Hence the renewed interest in the older 24-85 AF-S and its eventual purchase by me. The lens has worked out very well for me in this early stage. The range can hardly be beat and it is ghostly silent in operation. So far, there has been nothing about its operation or performance with negative films that has called attention to itself, but then admittedly, the way I use a lens is not to dissect every last bit of its optical quality and dismiss it because it might show some distortion at the edges. It works for me to produce some nice photos at weddings and so far, everyone seems pleased with the results. Can’t ask for more than that; however, although I had entertained some hope that this lens was going to be a giant killer and obviate the need or desire for the 28-70mm f2.8 AF-S lens, given the performance of the 24-85 lens with digital and given the importance of digital for my own photography, I doubt that my desire for the larger lens is going to be diminished any time soon. So, if you want maximum quality from a zoom lens, this lens performs well, but it is not a substitute for the professional quality lenses, but consider the price you'll have to pay to obtain that extra bit of performance. For those interested in this lens, you may also wish to consider the new Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens that is the smallest constant aperture normal range zoom lens with a filter diameter of 62mm and sells for about $650 CAN. Users reports started trickling in after I had already purchased the Nikkor 24-85mm lens, but they are very favorable of this lens as being a match for the much larger and much more expensive Nikkor 28-70mm f2.8 AF-S. Left Side Softness Example The red and yellow outline in the general scene below indicate what was being compared. The Raw file was converted via Phase Capture One with a modest 25% sharpening set. The first set of cropped images are taken directly from the post conversion TIFF file with no additional edits. The second set is from the 18-35mm lens. About the only rational explanation I can come up with that would excuse the lens is that the right side of the scene was closer to my location than the left side and because this was shot nearly wide-open, that what I see is a depth of field difference; however, that does not explain why the 18-35mm lens seems to be consistent across the whole frame. Although in defense of the 24-85mm lens, the left side softness is the same as what was obtained with the 18-35mm lens. Update - I've since learned that what you see below is a result of poor quality control from Nikon and/or a result of the lens being dropped in transit hard enough to move an element out of alignment. It's because of this that you want to test out a lens before purchase and ensure that it provides satisfactory performance across the board.
Reader's Comments:
Just a couple of clarifications/counterpoints: G series lenses without an aperture ring work perfectly on F80 and F100 cameras, because the cameras have dual command dials to control shutter and aperture settings. It is primarily with cameras that pre-date the F5 that will provide some restrictions with G lenses and require the use of either Program Auto or Shutter Priority modes only. Complete incompatibility is really only restricted to manual cameras for which the only aperture available is the minimum one. The 24-85mm f2.8-4 lens is actually quite a bit more expensive in Canada than the 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 G lens. Around 50% of the cost of the G lens more for the f2.8 version ($550 versus about $850). In the US the discrepancy in price is even more than 50% ($310 versus $550). The f2.8 lens certainly has some good points to it, as you indicated and as always, it is best for a prospective purchaser to handle both in the store and see which is best for his/her needs. However, to throw a wrinkle into this, if I were to do it again, I might just opt for the new Tamron Di 28-75mm f2.8 lens for its digital performance and constant f2.8 aperture - and it has an aperture ring. |
|
Correspondence & About this website Copyright © 1998-2008 Edwin Leong |
|
  |
|
The
24-85mm lens was introduced some time ago and has already been written
about by several people, so, this review is primarily about my motivations
for wanting to buy this lens. Probably the best review to be read
is by Thom Hogan, 
As
is now current Nikon practice, a lens hood is supplied and although
adequate for the wide-end, it does not appear adequate to cover the
long-end of the lens. I wouldn’t mind Nikon copying a Canon design
for their lens hoods mating to certain lenses such as the 24-70 L
and the old 28-70 L. 
Nikon
has produced some interesting lens options in recent times in the
normal range for the serious amateur and even professional market.
The highly regarded 28-105 lens is still going strong since its first
introduction with the F100 camera in 1999. The 24-120mm was an instant
success amongst pros and amateurs alike, the first 24-85 provided
decent speed at the wide end with a one-stop loss at the long end
in the same sized package as the 24-120 lens. Now we have the next
generation of the 24-85 AF-S and the 24-120 AF-S VR lenses, an embarrassment
of riches for Nikon users with so many lenses to choose from.
