A Cheap Zoom for my D700 ... 18-135 or similar?

[Keith]

Once every couple of months I have to photograph a huge billboard for the arts college I do occasional work for. The damned thing has to be photographed from about eight surrounding locations and a zoom is essential. I've been borrowing one from a friend up until now ... it's an 18-135 DX which creates a file crop on a full frame but it provides good enough image quality for what they require.

My friend has sold the lens so I now need something to replace it and it needs to be very cheap because I have no other use for a zoom aside from these occasions. The 18-135 focal length appears to be perfect so my question is what can I get to do the job that will cost very little?

Thanks in advance. 🙂

 

[robbeiflex]

Look for the old 70-300 AF-G (pre AF-S and no VR). I borrowed one to give it a try once. I was impressed with the image quality and sharpness but its an all plastic build and feels cheap. As a result you'll often find it under 100€ here, which I'm guessing is under 150 AUD these days. You might also find a 55-200 kit lens, again the non-VR version but it's more recent and therefore maybe more common, for the same or less.

Cheers,
Rob

 

[jarski]

perhaps (previous) D-version of Nikkor AF 24-120 (f3.5-5.6). useful focal range, and not as expensive as latest G-version. has manual option for setting aperture.

edit: there seems to be many versions of the lens.

 

[Keith]

Because the lens I'm using is DX ... at it's wide end (18mm) I think it's actually giving me about a 28mm field of view so anything full frame will need to start at 28mm or wider!

 

[migtex]

Keith,
24-120 AFS Version I will do what you need.
The best will be the new 28-300.. but since you said cheap...
Edit: also old manual Zoom's (Ais) could fit!

 

[kdemas]

At the risk of getting flamed the Sigma 28-300 mega zoom is a pretty decent little lens, for what it is. I throw it on as a walk around lens at races in the paddock as it gives me reach in a tiny package. Not like using the Nikkor 24-70 or 70-200 for ultimate quality but pretty decent and very flexible.

 

[robbeiflex]

Because the lens I'm using is DX ... at it's wide end (18mm) I think it's actually giving me about a 28mm field of view so anything full frame will need to start at 28mm or wider!

Keith,

In that case various Nikon, Tamron and Sigma 28-200mm from before the current AF-S versions might fit the bill. If the wide end is more important then Nikon AF 28-80mm are cheap, whereas if its the full range that matters then perhaps you should consider a Tamron or Sigma. Recent but used Sigma and Tamron lenses are dirt cheap as they don't hold their value as the Nikons do, but check reviews to make sure you're getting one of the better designs.

Cheers,
Rob

 

[Nikon Bob]

The Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 Aspherical XR (IF) is pretty good from the two samples I have shot with. They made a few versions over the years and I think this was the last one.

Bob

 

[mwooten]

The Tamron 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 Aspherical XR (IF) is pretty good from the two samples I have shot with. They made a few versions over the years and I think this was the last one.

Bob

Mine was real good too, until I dropped it.

 

[Ranchu]

There's that 18-55 in the classifieds. I had the non VR version and I thought it was surprisingly good. Sharp in the center at all apertures, which is uncommon!. A bit of CA, bokeh a bit harsh. No problem for the price. D700 has the crop mode?

edit: sorry, saw you want the 135mm length as well...

edit 2: I guess the lens is already sold from the classifieds.

Nevermind...

 

[EyeofSearle]

Nikon 28-105. Great range, sharp, cheap and a Nikon sleeper.

 

[Keith]

I'm not too worried about the longer end being a little short because I can always crop a little ... the slight reduction in file size/image quality is not a huge issue. Flare resistance is useful though because when I do the night shots I'm shooting straight into some fairly bright street lights from some locations! I do one shot at the wide end to put the billboard in it's environment and the next shot is zoomed tight with basically just the billboard itself. This shot is the longest distance I am from it with the current DX lens at it's widest and I'm using full zoom to isolate the board.

 

[Ranchu]

Don't remember having any flare issues. It handled backlight well, I don't think I shot any night shots with it though. Check it out on flickr, it's a good option.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Another vote for the AF 24-120 with or without VR. There's also the AF-S 24-85 and the AF 24-85 f2.8-4.

Yes, you said cheap, but cheap ain't necessarily good.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi Keith,

On film -for those AFzoom occasions- I use the 28-85 and the 75-300. Both are sharp and with decent distortion. Zooms going from wide to longer than 85 are in general a real compromise... If you're done with 85, it's your lens... I've abused mine for 14 years! Try to get the second version: same optics but a more comfortable focusing ring for manual focus...

Check this:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2885af.htm

None on KEH, B&H or Adorama right now, but some on ebay.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[kxl]

My vote goes to the 24-85mm AFS G, although not exactly cheap.

Thom Hogan likes it too: http://www.bythom.com/2485lens.htm

 

[dave lackey]

Nikon 28-105. Great range, sharp, cheap and a Nikon sleeper.

+5 on THAT lens, it is superb! And the price is so low, you have to pinch yourself!!! Wow.😀😀😀

Just re-read the original post...not sure if this lens even works on the D700. It did a fantastic job on my D2H and D2X though.

 

[PKR]

24-120 any version. I use one on an FX sensor and it's sharp and not too heavy.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

That 28-105 (never saw it before) looks like the best option... The same price of the 28-85, and a bit lighter with longer FL... That's cool. Kind of soft at 28 wide open (to KR...) and that's the usual for indoors, but I guess with sensors' ISOs, closing aperture one stop does it... But the 105 for portraits (and for Keith's need) makes it the winner IMO.

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Keith]

I have some 28-105's on my eBay watch list and I'll check KEH as well. Seem to be between $150.00 and $200.00

It does sound like my best option! If these people were happy with what that horrid DX was giving them this should be fine ... and it will be quite a useful lens generally.