-Low distortion
-Sharp (If properly AF-fine tuned)
-Good light transmission
-Sharp corners
-Cheap

Flare is rough but sometimes it is welcomed. In shots with a lot of white the coatings which or lack there of gives off a cold blueish/purple hue.

This is one of the best lenses you can get for FX for under $150. If you recently picked up an FX body and are looking for a daily use lens then get this. Skip the 28-80 G, it is cheap but way over-rated. I was just thinking about getting rid of it when I decided to test this lens against the 24-85 VR and Tamron 28-75. I decided to keep it since it has such low distortion and the corners are very sharp which is hard to come by in standard zoom lens especially one that is priced so low! Wide open at all focal lengths this lens is a solid performer. It does flare easily and lose contrast so if your picky about this then pass. But I like flare for certain shots. If you don't have this lens or any of the older D series lenses then I highly recommend getting one since all of the newer lenses and there coatings get rid of flare completely giving you no artistic capability...just correctness. Which honestly gets boring after awhile.

compact, macro

Not as sharp as 24-120 f/4, zooming is awkward.

I picked one of these on ebay. I thought it would be good for traveling with my D610. I have the 24-120 f/4 that is a bit too large than i would like. I like the size of the zoom, and the real macro setting is handy.
The zooming is a bit awkward as focal length and zoom ring turn are not proportional.

Anyway I tested against the 24-120 f/4 (recently got a refurb at half price) and 35mm f/2 AF S. The prime and the new zoom are definitely sharper, and the 24-120 and 35 are hard to tell apart. I photographed some group of buildings in Manhattan. Nikon D619 RAW / NEW 1/400 sec handheld. f/5.6 and f/8. the 28-105 does not look as sharp when zoomed at 100%. lettering on signs, brick walls in the far background are so much better on the 24-120. If I export the NEF files as full size 3 MB JPGs then the difference is not as distinct.

I need to test the D610 with the 28-105 vs my D7100 and 16-85 in daylight to see which combo is better (i bet the D7100).

In low light the D610 is so much better but the D7100 with the 16-85 is so much more portable.

Anyway I may have this zoom checked by photo tech, but i guess the 24-120 is a great lens.

Similar Products Used:

24-120 f/4, 35mm f/2 , 28-70 f/2.8

Sharp! Compact (compared to AFS pro lenses). Low cost. Macro works great.

Construction, not as durable as pro series lenses. Variable f-stop. High f-stop at 105mm.

I use this lens with my D700 for wedding photography. The focal range is perfect for group shots or zooming in. It's lighter than the pro 24-70mm f2.8 and for images as large as 20x30 just as good. It is very flair resistant, great color and contrast. I always hated zoom lenses, this is the lens that changed my opinion. For some who like to isolate their subject, a f2.8 zoom or faster prime would be a better choice. When I was shooting with DX bodies the 28mm setting was not wide enough for my taste. It's great for travel with a full frame body. I alternate this lens with my 24-85mm AFS, and always supplement with other primes from 14-600mm. Focus speed was never an issue for me, if your shooting sports it might be slow. It produces great images, but as with any piece of photographic equipment it's the photographer that makes the difference. I've seen these for less than $150.

Customer Service

None

Similar Products Used:

Nikon primes in the same focal range, Nikon 24-70mm, 24-85mm, 80-200mm, and Canon zooms.

sharp, cheap, good range, will sell all other avg lenses and keep this one.

none

It works great on the nikon d600, really good color rendition, clean & sharp, fine macro, but it's not a 5-star lens. 4-stars of course, and 5+ star value, and 6 stars for not being a one-trick pony ..but 5-stars overall? Like a 70-200 vr or a 24-120? LOL... ummmmm, no. It's as sharp as the 35mm 1.8G DX on the same camera, if you know that lens that gives you an idea of the sharpness. (I would never use the 35 on the 600 though I just tested that for sharpness--the 35 sucks on the 600.)

Similar Products Used:

d5100, mamiya 645

I found this lens to be very good.And much better than both versions of the Nikon 24-120. It's quite sharp and the macro function is pretty good too. I use it often. Even for professional work.

Rotating front element, but that is a minor issue.

I highly recommend this lens.

Customer Service

Not needed.

Similar Products Used:

Other 28-105 lenses.

Sharp, Light weight, good median zoom range.

Sticky zooming ring, a but if a bear to use with a polarizer. (ft. element rotates)

I have tried to replace this lens with both the Nikon 24-120 f4 - 24 &70mm f2.8mm
I keep coming back to this one. It is small and sharp. I use it on my D800e which is very unforgiving.
At f8 it was as sharp as was the 24-70mm 2.8 and so that lens went back. It was sharper than the 24-120
and so I returned it also.
Doing work in the field,I don't need a lot of weight. This lens not only gives me a good command of landscape and detail shots but it has that ability to get in close. All in a compact little package.
It is the only zoom I use and it is usually flanked by the 20mm f2.8 and the 105 macro f2,8.
It takes a 62mm filter as do the other two lenses. This makes packing my filters simpler.

Size/Weight/Price

Full Frame Range

Useful Macro

Great Portrait Isolation and Bokeh

Flare not bad

Great Sunstars

Decent Build

Low $ = low expectations - you will be delighted if used properly

Low Light Ability not great - BUT FOCUS IS ACCURATE AND CONSISTENT

CA in certain situations

Extending barrel = lame

Rotating barrel not great for Circular Polarizer, but rotates a minor degree

Macro switch transition requires lens focused towards infinity or +50mm

Stupid filter size

I was recently hired to cover events for a cruise line based employer - and they had requirements for a single purpose lens that had to be met (I shoot with only primes). This lens mates up nicely to the D700 - offers plenty of range - and doesn't weigh you down. I had used and contemplated the 24-85mm af-s for some time and decided to pass due to distortions. With some Googling you can find a couple old film or aps-c reviews on this lens. A couple people mentioned this lens for full frame so I said why not. The 28-105 shows imperceptable barrel distortion at the wide end - and offers more tele ability than 24-85 - and a truly useful macro mode. At F9 this baby is at its sharpest - which is easy to shoot at in bright daylight or with mounted flash - if you desire sharpest results. I use this for mostly portraits - it offers very pleasant bokeh and more than enough range. I really enjoy using the Rayflash Ringflash adapter with this lens as well. I really obsess over specialty glass - too much I believe - having spent over $10,000 in the past year I am at a point where I have the gear I am happy with - I just want to see what is out there that impresses for less. All Nikon full framers should buy this lens as soon as you get the chance. I got mine minty and dust free for next to nothing. Focus is spot on. Ken Rockwell whined about this lens - I feel he got a lousy sample. Or perhaps he dropped it prior to mounting lol - I dunno. I kinda wish one of the decent review labs would cover this lens (SlrGear, Photozone, etc...)

Here's the Photodo review and MTF data for this lens:

http://www.photodo.com/product_91_p4.html

Clearly sharper stopped down.

AF is dynamite on D700

CA in high contrast areas sucks (found out at ski slopes) - I haven't been able to reproduce results that terrible since however...


Check CraigLook.com or eBay and you're set...


Colin

www.opticpursuit.com

Similar Products Used:

General Zooms:

Nikon 17-35mm, 18-55 vr, 18-70, 16-85, 24-85 3.5, 28-200 af-d,

Tamron 17-50mm

Sigma 17-70mm

Versatillity. Very sharp. Very good colors. Light. Very god range. Very good construction.

None I have found

I was written a review for you but my Sony computer deleted it all. I was telling you that after reading many reviews about the Nikon 28-105 I decided to look for one. I was lucky because I found out a new one and I bought it without hesitation.
It was a few days ago but it enabled me to verify that this a great lens.I have a Nikon D700 and various lenses, among then the 17-35 2.8 and there isn't a notable difference between both. I am very happy with the 28-105, even though I have it since a few days.

I find on my D90 I get good sharp photos, colours are natural, very minimal distortion, lightweight, well made, practical, easy to buy filters for, An excellent walk round lens. AFD Lens best for me. Excellent price.

None I have come across, OK it is not a VR lens or AF-S but an excellent AFD and I have found the D in Nikon lenses that I would prefer better.

One Of The Best Nikon Lenses Money Can Buy.

When on holiday in the USA last year 2008. I took my Nikon D90 camera I looked around for a decent mid range lens. I spied upon the Nikon 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 AFD. It was Brand New and with 5 years warranty. I had the 18-200mm but that was to heavy and I didn`t like the creep on it most annoying, I had also tried the sigma 18-200 didn`t like that at all. I was looking for a mid range lens that was compact and light and now I have found it. What a lens! excellent quality, lightweight, just the one I wanted. It takes wonderful photos and the colours are so natural, its quite sharp and contrasty and has a Marco facility and will only work between 50 and 105mm I don't use the Marco anyway. I mostly use this lens between f8 and f11, I think that to compare this lens with other Nikon new type lenses such as the AFS lens then I would prefer the Nikon 28-105mm. OK it doesn`t auto focus on the D40/D40x nor the D60 but will focus manually, I would buy this lens for those cameras just to manual focus because I think this lens is such a brilliant lens, an all rounder and there is no need to buy anything else. OK if you want something very long then go for something say 100-300mm but if you are like me your photography is in the mid range, then I would highly recommend this lens that`s if you can find a decent one. Go on give the Nikon 28-105mm a chance you will not be disappointed I wasn`t , not even on my Nikon D90. To be honest for me there is not a Nikon lens out there that I can say is perfect for the D90 but this little lens for my photography work is just 99.9% right for me.

Customer Service

I am sorry when you buy NIKON you should never need there services, I haven`t.

Similar Products Used:

My photography equipment list is as follows which I think for the type work I need it for is just about right.
Nikon 28-105mm Brilliant.
Nikon 55-200mm VR Brilliant.
Nikon 50mm 1.8 Brilliant.
and another Nikon 28.70mm AFD also bought at same time in USA also Brilliant.

Rotating zoom mechanism as opposed to the slide type. It is less likely to creep out of the focal length position you last moved it to because of it. All in all, this is a sturdy zoom lens that offers a great range (moderately wide angle for landscapes and some event shots to slight telephoto for flattering portraits). It does not feel delicate ike some popular zooms do.

It has a wonderful hard plastic bayonet mount lens shade. Some may find the lens shade to be bulky, but I like it. the bayonet mount is a huge benefit to me because it is easy on and easy off yet very secure when in place. It can also be mounted backwards on the front of the lens which makes it incredibly easy to transport - an impossible task for thread mounted lens shades.

I don't use it often, but the macro feature works well and is very convenient. The lens focuses quickly enough when attached to my F100. I haven't tried it on my recently acquired D50 digital camera.

I will also say that sharpness and resolving power are more than good enough. I don't look at my work through a loupe unless I am reviewing slides or checking some detail on a negative. I would challenge anyone to pick out a significant difference - when viewed at the distance the audience will most likely see the final image - in a shot taken with this lens and a similar shot taken with a lens at twice the price.

Alas, it let me down! I can't ignore the fact that the reason I sat down to write this piece after a flawless experience with the lens over the last 7 1/2 years and gobs of exposures made is that it failed me. By backing out of focus as it did my family and our descendents are denied the record of a unique moment captured for the ages.

I don't have a good feel as to how common this defocussing problem is and I don't want to be unfair to Nikon if this is a one in a million occurance. However, the only reason I am scoring it a 3 Star Overall rating is that at one of the most critical moments in my shooting experience and during a rare if not singular personal moment, it failed me.

This has been an excellent lens for me over the years. It came with the F100 I bought in June of 2000 and I have been very happy with it.

Having said that, I was crushed when I found out too late that it was defocusing - or unfocusing - with subjects more than ten feet away! This problem arose (as these things always do) when I took a once-in-a-lifetime photo of my mother's side of the family while visiting Detroit just this past July. I didn't find out until I returned to New England and had the film developed.

The result of the defocusing is that one can barely make out details of my family's faces. You can tell who's who, but that's about it. I hope that some wizard at Photoshop can sharpen it up a bit, but that's going off on a tangent.

Back to the lens. It has always been great with strong build quality and a good "hand feel" to it. I tend to shoot at wider aperatures and I can find no real fault with sharpness at the viewing sizes of my images - typically no bigger than 5x7.

Bear in mind that if you need to use a loupe or magnifying glass to find flaws in sharpness or resolving power, you probably have a pretty good lens! If your audience really only sees your images at 5x7 or 8x10 and not cropped too much, miniscule differences in sharpness or resolving power is unimportant. If sharpness is critical, then stop it down to f8 or smaller and remember to use a good quality tripod or monopod.

With that in mind, I highly recommend this lens for the image quality, build quality, and price. It isn't perfect, but it's worth it. This is a great lens for all but the most demanding expert/professional. I am still crushed that it failed me when it did. I will rue that occurance to my grave. However, in 35 years of shooting, I have learned that sometimes the cosmos are just working against you! The true lesson here is that if the shot is really critical, use manual focus (and exposure for that matter!) and cross your fingers.

Customer Service

I have no opinion on this.

Similar Products Used:

Olympus OM-1 and Zuiko lenses, Canon F-Tb, Exacta, Miranda, Pentax, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex and so on. The main point here is that this is the first auto focus and auto exposure system I've used with any regularity.