According provided by lens Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G (MKIII) many thanks to Sergey Slepnev.
Review Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G (MKIII)
There are three versions of the lens:
- Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.5-5.6D (MKI) - was produced from 1995 to 1999. Optical design 7/7.
- Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.5-5.6D (MKII) - was produced from 1999 to 2001. Optical design 8/8. An overview of this version can be viewed here.
- Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G (MKIII) - was produced from 2001 to 2005. Optical design 6/6. Now you are reading a review about this version. Exists in black and silver (white) case (see).
Unlike MKI and MKII, Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G is missing aperture control ringbut increased slightly aperture - from F / 3.5 to F / 3.3 (the difference is 13%). Also, the MKIII version was available in black and silver cases.
Basic lens specifications
Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G is probably the easiest auto focus zoom lens for full-length cameras... It has been released in countless pieces, mostly Nikon 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G came as a stock lens for Nikon film cameras. We can say that this is an analogue Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED SWM Aspherical for cameras Nikon DX (gives EGF 27-82.5, almost the same as Nikon 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G on a full-frame camera, and also has a similar aperture and build quality). Nowadays, a modern replacement for Nikon 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G can be considered Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm 1: 3.5-4.5G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical.
Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G when focusing on MDF and 80 mm FR.
In addition to the marks of the focal length and the mark of the bayonet mount, it does not have any useful indicators. Such lenses were made in Thailand, they saved on assembly, therefore, the lens has a plastic bayonet mount and a rather flimsy body. The zoom ring, in contrast to the focus ring, is rubberized. But thanks to this, the lens turned out to be very, very light, and in addition very compact. This is one of the lightest zoom lenses. auto focus for cameras Nikon fx. Only easier Nikon AF Nikkor 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6D (MKII).
Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G rear view. During zoom, the rear lens moves (the front does not rotate)
This 'lightweight' boasts very fast focusing, which has improved accuracy over the version MKII. When focusing, the front lens rotates and moves forward. The focusing ring is very narrow and, in fact, combined with the front of the lens trunk, rotates 80 degrees. MDF is only 35 cm and it is not difficult to remove small objects. When zooming, the trunk of the lens moves in waves, having the most compact dimensions at 50 mm of focal length. From the foregoing, we can conclude that this lens is not too suitable for serious use with special filters (for example, polarizing).
Tags Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G
It's important: auto focus with this lens is available only when using him on cameras with built-in motor focusing.
Exact list Nikon DSLR cameras with a built-in focus motor, on which this lens will focus automatically:
- D1, D1h, D1x, D2x, D2xs, D2h, D2hs
- D3, D3x, D3s, D4, D4s, D5, D6
- Df
- D50, D70, D70s, D80, D90
- D7000, D7100, D7200,D7500
- D100, D200, D300, D300s,D500
- D600, D610, D750, D780
- D700, D800,D800E, D810, D810a, D850
- Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro, S2 Pro, S3 ProS3 Pro UVIR, S5 ProIS Pro
- Kodak DCS PRO 14n, DCS Pro SLR/n
Exact list Nikon DSLR cameras without a built-in focus motor, on which this lens will not focus automatically:
Only auto focus and sound confirmation of focus will not work with these cameras, all other important functions, such as automatic exposure metering and automatic iris control, will work well.
You will find a lot of useful information on the types of cameras and lenses Nikon here.
View of two Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G lenses and Nikon DX AF-S Micro Nikkor 40mm 1: 2.8G
However, the image quality is an order of magnitude better than you might think when evaluating the lens in appearance :).
Here link to the archive with the originals - 445 MB, 42 NEF (RAW) photos from camera Nikon D700.
Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G
Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
List of all Nikon FX 28-XXX autofocus lenses:
- Nikon 28-70 mm 1: 2.8D AF-S Nikkor ED SWM (black / white)
- Nikon 28-70 mm 1: 3.5-4.5 AF Nikkor (MKI)
- Nikon 28-70 mm 1: 3.5-4.5D AF Nikkor (MKII)
- Nikon 28-80 mm 1: 3.5-5.6D AF Nikkor (MKI)
- Nikon 28-80 mm 1: 3.5-5.6D AF Nikkor (MKII)
- Nikon 28-80 mm 1: 3.3-5.6G AF Nikkor (MKIII, black / silver)
- Nikon 28-85 mm 1: 3.5-4.5 AF Nikkor (MKI)
- Nikon 28-85 mm 1: 3.5-4.5 AF Nikkor (MKII)
- Nikon 28-100 mm 1: 3.5-5.6G AF Nikkor (black / silver)
- Nikon 28-105 mm 1: 3.5-4.5D AF Nikkor (Japan / China)
- Nikon 28-200 mm 1: 3.5-5.6D AF Nikkor (Japan / China, Black / Silver)
- Nikon 28-200 mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED IF Aspherical AF Nikkor (Japan / Thailand)
- Nikon 28-300 mm 1: 3.5-5.6G AF-S Nikkor ED SWM VR IF Aspherical
The catalog of modern universal lenses for Nikon can be see here.
Results
Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G (MKIII) is a very simple and affordable lens, you can buy it for mere pennies on the secondary market. In our time, it is of no value, since there are many better solutions. It is unlikely that anyone is going to use it on a full-format digital signal center, and for cropped cameras, the lens does not have the most convenient FR range. Nevertheless, it is worth noting the lightness, fast autofocus and, in general, good image quality for such a crumb :)
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Thanks for your review. There is an option to take a used one - I think for a film F80, it was just interesting what kind of beast.
Review arrived in time on time))
How much are you ready to take?
I bought with the device F65 for 550 UAH, sold F65 for 400 UAH. The lens came out 170grn with delivery))
On film it will be just right - because of 28mm. Will interfere with everything, and still remain)
I saw a photo of the Nikon DX AF-S Micro Nikkor 40mm 1: 2.8G lens in your test. If you are planning to test it, it would be interesting to see it not only as a macro lens, but also as a regular fixture (I have been interested in this lens for a long time, I plan to purchase it). Interesting in terms of the inherent sharpness of macro lenses during normal shooting (street, people, etc. ...)
I have one too. got almost free with a used D50 earplug. gives a surprisingly wonderful picture, including by color. lightweight and incredibly easy to use. tenacious and accurate AF. a certain Ken Rockwell generally put him on the list of Nikon's top 10 lenses :) he shot a large number of wonderful shots for this kid. he has Pts. small MDF, for okolomakro just a great 80mm FR lens.
My ex F65 had just such a lens. There have never been any claims to it - very good glass.
Good afternoon, colleagues. Someone used it on the 700k for a long time? I would like to listen to reviews.
I got this miracle together with the service D700. I reread everything I could find on the net about this lens and the impression is that I have a completely different glass. The picture quality is ugly: shooting on the street - the shadows are "hammered", artifacts are incomprehensible even at low iso. Indoors, it lathers at short exposures with a flash. I selected aperture / shutter speed combinations, shot at different times of the day and in different weather conditions, tried raw - all the quality of a digital camera is on its side. This is, alas, the only lens at work for an fx camera, but even a cheap 70-300 telephoto (the one for crops and without a stabilizer), when installed on a 700-ku, gives an incomparably better picture than a 28-80. Maybe he's killed me? This lens ...
Dear Andrey, Considering the myriad of lenses produced, their price, and the "skill" of the hands that used this subject before you, it is quite possible that the lens has internal damage (congenital or acquired), which negatively affects the image. As the owner of this device, I can characterize it with absolute confidence as a super-cheap device for teaching the basics of photography, for fishing, hunting, etc., “guest” (for “let me shoot”). Surprisingly, with its design, it does not give a picture much worse than, for example, “Sigma 2,8 \ 24-70 EX DG Macro”, but it costs at least 10 times cheaper. In your case, it is simply not worth wearing bast shoes to the tailcoat, in other words, paired with the D700 - a certain status dissonance is created. (IMHO)
for nikon d3100 will fit ?? my 18-55 flew, I want a cheap replacement ...
Tanya, just above it was said that this lens is for a carcass with a “screwdriver”, ie. Your D3100 goes by in autofocus plan, manual focus only will
excellent glass for its value, the only thing on cameras without a screwdriver is to use manual focus
Which, however, only enhances the pleasure of using this glass.
Arkady. You have a typo in your review (in the paragraph between the table picture and the lens picture). You write that DX 18-55 for DX cameras has an EGF of 27-82,5 can you mean for FX cameras ??
Everything is right there.
Hi, I have a nyakon 5200, is it worth taking this lens? there is only fix 35 and helios 44-2
oh, somehow ugly - nyakon))))) well nikon naturally __))
Even with my good attitude to this lens, it is definitely not worth taking for the D5200. It loses to the fixes you have in almost all parameters, except for weight and price. This lens was developed as a budget “set” for an amateur film series of cameras like “F65”. Its modern counterpart for your camera is “18-55”. If you want to buy a universal zoom, then take the native Nikkor "18-200" (on the secondary market $ 250- $ 300), as a "travel" is quite good. But I repeat - the image quality that your fixes give will not be, but there will be versatility and efficiency. If the quality of the resulting image is a priority, then in this case, continue to shoot with fixes, and purchase them in accordance with your plot preferences and financial capabilities. Personally, I would definitely buy something from telephoto cameras, for example, “MC Jupiter 37” - cheap, reliable, and the picture is wonderful, though without autofocus and “jumping” aperture, but given the presence of “Helios 44”, it seems that this moment is not for you especially frightening. I would be glad if my comment helps you a little.
Although I do not recommend purchasing “Nikkor 28-80 \ 3,3-5,6” in your case, I will add a picture from it.
Huge mercy !!! I also changed my mind about buying this lens) it makes no sense)))) I look closely at 55-200)), but of course I'm used to taking a fix, the picture is good!))) I'm afraid to take 18-200, although I miss it! 18 mm sometimes by the way.
Jupiter plans)
Do not buy any version of the Nikon 55-200 under any circumstances, when I remember this lens I have no words - only expressions and drooling! I got it as a "load" I used it ... However, I strongly do not recommend purchasing any lenses of the Chinese assembly!
Well, why so categorically - a lens of the 18-55, -105 series (of the same quality), if not expensive - it makes sense to walk around the country with it, etc. Here, in some thread, Simon laid out good pictures from him with twisted, however, sharpness, I will show mine, unedited:
3:
2:
and 4:
And with "Jupiter-37" picture for example.
excellent sharpness. and 28-80 in my opinion is inferior to the 18-55th
I think that it really is a little inferior in sharpness. But for me, having a slightly longer RF (80 versus 55) is preferable. In addition, “28-80” is a little less “dermatological”, although both of them can be used as a “portraitist” only in a reportage and in a “hike” (IMHO). But, as Arkady has repeatedly and very rightly remarked: “… it is important - to shoot with nothing, but how to shoot!”. Very, very many users, at least fifteen years ago, generally used this subject as the main (and often the only) lens. In addition, it is often necessary to shoot in such a “warm” friendly-family atmosphere that it is dangerous to cling to “18-200” - they can step on the “trunk”! This is where the price and weight advantages of the “28-80” are manifested in all their glory, and what is most surprising, the portrayed, have never complained about either low resolution, or almost complete absence of bokeh, or bad geometry.
Below is an example of a similar "portrait on a smoke break" (D70, FR 50mm, aperture 4,5)
Please tell me, can anyone come across. I bought a f65 and such a lens, but for some reason I press the shutter release button and no reaction. Everywhere is manul mode ..
Does the descent not work?
Are the batteries fresh? If the battery “blinks” (low), the shutter release is disabled.
I will defend this lens. I got it with a film f55 and, in my inexperienced eye, is similar to a whale one, plus it reaches 80mm. And its price is two helios. Now 18-55 broke down and 28-80 finally settled on my carcass, hinting at an upgrade to d80
I was also very happy with this lens, so I will support it. In terms of sharpness, it is not worse than the whale 18-55 (except maybe a little worse than 18-55 bp2 and newer), but overall it is very good. In addition, on the same focal lengths it is lighter. It also has noticeably faster autofocus. All in all, the lens is quite good for its price. It's especially nice with him in full frame - for a couple of thousand comes an excellent staff, which is not a pity and can be used in the tail and in the mane :)
And I have the same opinion. I put it on d50, the picture is contrasting, clear. AF is very fast. Took for 2,5r.
I think the owners of FF have a more modern and expensive alternative, which is why Arkady considered that this glass “has no value” although as a free, lightweight, compact whale, why not
Well, I don’t know, I used it on the d610 and I can’t say anything really bad about the lens.
Oh yes, dear and very good. more than enough expensive alternatives. And is quality increasing in proportion to price?
I will support.
An affordable lens is well suited for those who are taking their first steps and are not ready to spend more money so far. Subjectively better than whale 18-55. Evaluation is not by convenience, but by the resulting picture, in particular, again subjectively, due to better blurring of the background, but having a whale of 18-55, changing it to the specified 28-80 or taking it additionally, it makes no sense.
For those who want to immediately learn and make masterpieces, it may not work.
Again, different lenses mean different possibilities. Sometimes it is better to zoom with your feet, having a high-aperture fix, but sometimes the angle that you get, being at a certain point and shooting at the zoom, you will not get on the fix, simply because you cannot fly or there are other obstacles. Again, this is if you have only one lens at hand, and not several multi-focus fixes. So you just went out for a walk, you probably won't want to carry several lenses in your bag all the time.
In the same price range, Sigma and Tamron were offered with the same parameters - 28-80 AF 3,5-5,6 The price for all three lenses differed within 100 hryvnia (1000-1100, as of this year). I took Nikon because it has a shorter focusing distance - 35 cm versus 50 cm for Sigma and 70 cm for Tamron. And according to reviews, but this is subjective, not objective, they said that Nikon is sharper. There was no way to check. Sigma has a macro mode, but I don't really need it.
Ps maybe someone will be interested before buying: at the long end (80 mm) on the camera, crop 1,5 gives the same picture (according to the size of the objects) as we see with our eyes. With one eye, look at the viewfinder, and with the other at the same objects live, the picture is one-on-one.
By the same principle, you can calculate the real multiplicity of optics (monoculars, etc.), especially Chinese (or only Chinese, because they almost always lie, or brazenly, or cunning, for example, they write 16x40, and 40 is the same diameter of the front lens, but 16 is not a multiplicity at all, but ... the diameter of the front lens, kind of honest, but it's cheating). Take 2 identical objects, put them at different distances from each other, with one eye look through the monocular at one object, with the other eye at the other. Move away or approach the distance when these objects are visually the same. Then you simply measure the distance from this place to both objects and calculate by dividing the distance from the observation point to the object that was looked at through the monocular by the distance from the observation point to the second object (which was looked at with the eye). The meaning is clear: if the magnification is, say, 10x, then in the monocular you will see an object located 20 m away from you, as you should see this object live at a distance of 2 m from you.
Many letters, but maybe someone will be useful.
And you know that VIs are different for different cameras: for example, d200 has an increase of 0,94; for d5100 - 0,78?
You are right, already noticed. That I checked in comparison with 18-55, taking photos from the same distance. The first steps, they are, you learn from your mistakes.
Moreover, having previously read through the focal length and equivalent focal length, I mistakenly thought that lenses from a full frame give x1,5 to their native DX lenses, but in practice it turned out that the numbers in mm say the same thing. That is, the 28-80 lens with a full frame did not give the picture that the DX lens gives at 42-120 mm, it gave the picture that the DX lens gives at its 28-80. On Nikon crop, a shot from the DX18-55 at 50 mm gave the same picture as a 28-80 (with a full frame lens) at 50 mm.
As a result, I realized that the 28-80 lens, which is mentioned in the article, is quite good, but as a replacement for the DX18-55, it makes no sense to consider it: at a wide angle 18-55 gives a much better overview, and at a long angle the difference is between 55 and 80 not so important as to sacrifice 18mm for 28mm. And if 18-55 also with its own motor and some kind of stabilization, then even more so.
Oh, Arkady. I read your tests. You are doing a very interesting job, but not completely. Somewhere you cut it off and slip into a stereotypical repetition of popular opinions on the Internet, unfinished, untested. As a result, the result is of little value, alas.
For a high-quality result, it is desirable to be both technically and photographically prepared, one might say - two heads higher than all your opponents, as well as to know your language well and the language from which you get some common terms, concepts, etc. from the Internet (translations there, to put it mildly , very bad). This will allow you to confidently and with pleasure discover the most interesting depths of both optical and photographic creativity.
Do not be offended! Respectfully yours, Vladislav, developer with great experience, exhibition photographer with even more experience, artist ... and, alas, an old man.
1. Well, we see and appreciate its result, even the official representatives of Nikon appreciate it. And we are not trying to "get a ruler and measure themselves" with the author. But your vast experience is somehow not.
Do not be offended. Respectfully, the reader is joyful with ugroooomny experience.
2. if Arkady wrote in “his” language, you would not have read this site.
By the way, it so happened that in my youth I was twice listed in the book of the spiritual and intellectual elite of my native city for my contribution to Ukrainian literature.
Of course, my reviews may not always be exemplary, but I will strive for the best.
and even.
"In his youth" - anything is better than "posthumous"
You do not cease to amaze Arkady. Happy birthday all the best
as soon as the AA filters removed all the cheap lenses sang yes + multipixel machines allow you to cut from the frame what is required and qualitatively slowly solve composition issues. void delusion \ I see the pictures, I trust the photographer and draw conclusions \ here they even mentioned the status \ I can give good advice: buy a dummy of the coolest camera from the Chinese, glue a dummy of a cool lens and throw dice on the local broadway ... the tailor said: it is not the jacket that sings, but the actor in it.
I bought it today on Fuji S3 Pro, after the manual Jupiter-37A it’s just a buzz.
...
I have not read the entire article, but I must have read the conclusion. I disagree. The lens is excellent and makes an excellent replacement for those who have a head on their shoulders and hands in order. Those who do not know how to shoot, have no idea, then even 1,4 will not help)). I got caught in a state of concretely new. The figure is clear - no questions asked. But on the film I was pleasantly surprised! Not expected. Thanks to this model, I have already fully understood that it is absolutely not worth spending money on a lens for 1000uy on average. Well, if only to pamper your pride and show how cool you are)). In my segment I give the lens 5 out of 5.
I bought this lens in “silver”. Feels like a plastic toy, 18-55 after it seems monolithic. The condition is new at a price of about 3500 rubles, with a makeweight in the form of a new F55. The quality of the photo is no worse than the same 18-55 vr even at 24 megapixel crop, but more chromaticity. And maybe even sharper. An excellent addition to the existing 116 / 2.8, 50 / 1.8, 105 / 2.5, 70-300 vr and jamming toads for the transition to FF. And then I'll take something in return, otherwise the price of universal zoom FF lenses is sometimes more expensive than a carcass. Thanks for your review.
I will sell Nikon D50 complete with a Nikon AF lens Nikkor 28-80mm F 3.3 - 5.6 G (MK ІІІ), charging and 2 batteries, a soft bag as a gift. Mileage 24 thousand frames. Price: 2000 UAH per set. Phone 0681306220. Ukraine.
I got this, when buying on Avito, along with nikon D70. The quality of the picture pleasantly surprised.
I had a zenith with a vaunted Helios 1: 2, I bought a Nikon F65 with this lens. Could not get enough. Zaitsev does not catch, sharp, interesting bokeh, almost 100% of successful pictures on film. A head better than the Soviet iron, albeit made of plastic!
Lens as a lens, at the moment, is probably the cheapest AF-zoom for FF (that's why it was bought for a penny). Boke, one might say - none. The picture is flat and not interesting. AF is surprisingly pretty nimble. The picture even from the Deshman Helios 44-2 is more interesting, and from Helios-81H it is also sharper and with better detail.
With Zenit-ET + Helios 44-2 + Jupiter 37a, they even managed to shoot dancing in motion, the marriage was only when someone got into the frame 'in time'.
- once upon a time, when I switched from D-90 to D-600 - I bought it as a temporary staff for FF for 25 bucks.
I shoot mainly at 50 / 1,4G, 85 / 1,8G and 80-200 / 2,8D - the lens turned out to be quite good at 28mm as a quite tolerable width and quite tolerable as a landscape photographer - oddly enough, but turned out to be quite a decent portrait lens for 80 mm and when it was too lazy to change to fixes - it gave itself a pretty decent picture for such a kid, but as a landscape painter it did not last very long - Sigma 10-20 / 4,0-5,6 on D600 in crop mode -gives much better results ...
Now I’m completely gone on the shelf for well-deserved peace, and to replace it with a wide angle, 16-35 / 4,0 VR was bought
What does it mean "for cropped cameras, the lens does not have the most convenient FR range"
I want to buy this lens for the Nikon D90 camera what will be wrong there?
This Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1: 3.3-5.6G is a universal lens for full-frame cameras (film or digital), where its viewing angles are very convenient. From 28mm wide-angle to 80mm short TV range. In viewing angles on full-frame cameras, viewing angles roughly correspond to the 18-55mm lens on Nikon cropped cameras.
But when you put 28-80 on a cropped camera, viewing angles will not be so convenient. Often the wide-angle range will not be enough. For example, 18mm and 28mm on a cropped camera differ very, very significantly. Because as a universal lens on cropped cameras, this lens performs its role poorly. At the same time, no one forbids them to use it, but for the vast majority of tasks, any 18-55 on a cropped camera will be better, especially if these are versions with a stabilizer, for example, as inexpensive Nikon 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor
This means that the lens will not give wide angles, such as 17-18mm (on the crop, EU-but), which means that taking it somewhere as a universal for everything is depriving yourself of wide plans. The advantages of the lens are its low price, weight, dimensions, also the ability to use a retro item from the film era, and a good picture for its “frivolity”. In my opinion, 18-105 depicts no worse, if you do not look intensely for filmness, plasticity, etc.
Arkady, wrote without seeing your comment, do not think that I am repeating it as an ass.
All ok, well explained. This is a frequent question, let it be maximally disclosed.
thanks for the information!