The David Attenborough of photography. Thank you for the review!

I believe you have the 2nd version of the Nikkor 43-86mm which was apparently a much improved when compared to the first verisons. The first verison has the lettering inside the filter thread and the newer version has the letting outside the filter thread. This probably explains why you are quite happy with your copy, there really isn't anything wrong with it.

I have the Nikon 43-86mm f3.5 Paid $10 here is the USA at a used camera shop. Very crazy lens, but of course that means would I like.

Great, as ever, love the fact that you didn't leave the Emmy winner until last - so cool man!

Minolta's have to be the most under-rated cameras and lenses in history. They are excellent.

Thanks Nigel! Got the Vivitar a few months ago following your recommendation and Im really happy with it. Solid build, compact and pretty sharp. Had to get a hood for it though as it flares pretty easily.

Thanks for another great review Nigel. It's good to see you paying attention to a less popular area of lens history. I have a couple of third-party zoom lenses from the 1970s, one which I have owned myself since new and the other I inherited from my late father over ten years ago, both of which have languished in the back of my cupboard for years while I paid more attention to vintage primes. Maybe now I will give them another try with mirrorless. The lens I inherited is a Vivitar (made by Tokina) 35-105 f3.5 constant aperture with internal zoom and a close focus function. It is a heavy lens at 749 grams and has a light haze on the inside of the rear element which looks like a lubricant spray, definitely not fungus.

another great vid. I'd always avoided the 43-86 Nikkor when i'd seen it on ebay as it had a poor reputation, a relatively old/pioneering zoom. When I bought my FE, there was no such thing as a kit lens - you just bought the body and picked a lens to go with it, something like the 50-f2, 1.8, 1.4 or 55 macro, or that zoom, or whatever you fancied and could afford. After your previous review however, I did get one of the second versions of the lens, reputed to be a lot better. Kept it for Christmas day from my wife - It is one of the best made lenses I've got, very solid and smooth, and while i was helping make the dinner my son took some beautiful pictures with it, with a lovely "glow" about them. Having taken it out a little, it is certainly sharp enough and does give nice out of focus areas. So thanks again, that's another addition to the expanding drawer of old lenses!

Im currently using a Hanimex 35-70 f2.5-3.5 and I somehow love it. It’s not a sharp lens wide open by any means, but having the option to go to f2.5 when the lighting situation is bad is something I love. The 1:2.7 macro is great and the build quality is one of the best I’ve seen to date. Got it in mint condition for 20€. First vintage zoom lens I bought and it got me interested how some of the better ones perform. Hope you cover them more,cause some don’t seem to be as bad as their reputation. Especially combined with modern cameras and software. Great video!

i was looking for a nice short zoom to take with me when i travel or can't take more than one lens and now i have four fantastic, Zenography-approved, options! Thank you so much and keep it up!

Nice review. Your channel helped get me into vintage lenses.

Beautiful images out of these little sleepers. I’ve got the vivitar which was purchased brand new to go with my canon AE-1 P back in the day. And just ordered an FD to Nikon F adapter to pair my z6 with my old canon primes. This one would have stayed in the box... thanks for this review!

Really appreciate what you are doing on this channel. I'm fairly new to the hobby and was taken aback by how expensive modern lenses are. You've shown me the light and I have recently acquired a beautiful old Pentax-A 50mm f1.7 for my old but very capable Pentax K-5. I'm blown away with what I've been able to achieve with this combination. Thank you and keep up the great work.

Thank you for a great video again, Nigel, and 4 more lenses to look out for. I particularly like the look of that Nikon, and also the Minolta. Ah, well, the wallet will take another beating! Nights are getting lighter, it's a little warmer during the day here in the frozen North East. Time to get wrapped up and take some pics. Thank you again George

I also have a vintage Nikon short zoom lens; the Zoom-NIKKOR 28-45mm f/4.5. Introduced in 1975, this was the first mass manufactured short zoom lens manufactured by Nikon. This was also the first wide angle zoom with a minimum focal length of 28mm. This lens has 11 elements in 7 groups, a minimum aperture of 22, & seven blades. It is a beautiful little lens with internal focus & internal zoom. Although relatively small, this professional lens is quite heavy due to its all metal construction, 11 elements, & large diameter (72mm filter). Luckily, as with your Nikon short zoom, mine retains the threaded metal front lens cap.

After watching your video, I ordered the Minolta for my BMPCC 4k with an adapter, for video use!

the Minolta 28-70 F3.5-4.8 was made late on just before the demise of the MF lenses and was manufactured by Tokina but it is thought that the lens coatings are Minolta which is probaly why its retained the minolta colours ...the minolta zoom to look out for is the Rokkor 35-70 F3.5 macro which was made in collaboration with Leica which was also the leica vario-elmar-r 35-70mm fitted on the leica R mount SLRs...this lens had 3 versions the 1st had no macro which was the same as the Leica lens the other 2 had macro and each new version was slightly optically better than the previous ...its bigger than the 28-70 as its F3.5 straight though and expect to pay a little more

Always liked the asmr feel of your reviews. I filmed a few nature shots on vintage lenses.

Hello Nigel, many thanks for this review! With a friend of mine - he‘s also a photography enthusiast - I enjoy watching your videos! I grew up with Minolta in the 1980s. The Minolta MD 3.5/35-70mm Macro is also a fantastic choice. Please have a look at that. Also a hidden gem is the Olympus OM Zuiko 4.0/35-70mm albeit a bit plasticy compared to the other Zuiko lenses. Very sharp indeed, exuberant colors but a bit flare prone. I used it back in 2014 on my Canon 6D I had via an adapter. Best wishes from nearby Stuttgart and have a nice Sunday, Ralf

I have the Nikkor 35-70mm f/4 and RMC Tokina 35-70mm f/3.5. Both are great lenses. I like this range of zoom lenses.

I very much enjoy your reviews! Some great low cost options for film and digital photography. The 3rd part Zoom lens manufacturers are great, and cheap. As all these lens systems were designed and optimized for film - I wonder if there are differences in contrast and color when shooting digital compared with film?

That Kiron sounds very interesting. I also have the Nikon lens and found it not as bad as expected despite also having a bit of haze. I was surprised. I am gifting it to a young guy at work who uses a digital Nikon. Thanks for the interesting content as always.

Very nice review again. Well done

The Nikon 43-86mm got it in my cupboard had it for years Nigel..though have not used it recently I always found it very good...always a curio in a way cos of that doubling of focal length I have always thought... Oh well it takes all sorts... Thank you for the interesting episode once again.....

Excellent information! The could hear the camera police closing in on you at about 16:37, I see they let you go after that. Close call. Had they arrested you, you could have done a selfie-Weegee, or if it had become particularly strange a selfie-Crewdson. Best wishes!

I received my Minolta 28-70 today and I must say it's such a smooth turning almost NOS condition compact lens. I found the macro function once you turn the aperture ring past the notch at 70mm surprisingly useful. Great review like always btw

Nice video as usual :) How do you do to clean yours lens like that ? You should share a video about your clearing secrets :)

This is really interesting. Back in the day, the photo press like Amateur Photographer would tell you to avoid these lenses like the plague. Unless you could afford Canon or Nikon, you may as well not bother. Great that you are putting that right. I had that Kiron lens on my OM10 & loved it. There has always been this myth that fast apertures & pin sharpness are what everyone needs. Thank you for proving that wrong. You have a great channel. Thank you.

Great show....!!!!

If the Minolta MD 28-70 is anything like the MD 28-85 "Macro" I use on my a7RIII, then it's a crazy fun manual lens to shoot with.

I might just have the most unlikely inclusion to this category in the form of my Centon 28-70 f3.5 -4.8 zoom. Same spec as your Minolta, my Centon is in Minolta MD mount. It was really cheap for me to buy brand new at the time. However in the popular photo journals of the time, Centon lenses got a right slagging off. At time of purchase i alluded to this to sales guy @ jessops who said ok then pay deposit and go away and try, things were a lot more trusting then!. Well, took it away and shot a roll of ORWO chrome 80 ASA thru my Minolta X300 and was genuinely delighted. Took it back to jessops to complete the sale and the guy chucked in jessops own brand sky light 1A. I still have it, no point in parting with it bcos wont get a red cent. its pristine, sharp ! built like brick shed works great with my XE1. Its push pull and the Macro facility really does work excellently. Its made in Korea ( because it says in instructions) . Its NOT a copy of the Minolta, because i have one of those as well. I know they made them in Pentax K and other mounts but if anyone else has the same Centon it would be great if they shared experiences, for your post. Cheers.

Hi there, I’m one of your subscribers and I always watch and listen to your reviews with pleasure. As you, I’m a digital and film shooter and I also collect old lenses. Just came upon one in my drawers, an Auto Rikenon, 50mm, 1.7. I don’t think you had made a review about this lens, before. What do you think? Do you have any knowledge of it? And could I use it with my Sony NEX-6 with an adapter? Look forward to hearing from you! Keep on the beautiful work you do👍🏻👍🏻!

The post 1976 version of the Nikon 43-86mm f3.5 was changed from 9 lens elements to 11 and was much, much better than the earlier version. Some of Nikon's early pre AI wide-angle lenses were also pretty dreadful.

If you get a chance try the Minolta MD zoom 35-70mm f/3.5. also very good!

amazing back ground blur character in the first vivtar lens, surprising to see in a zoom lens when it feels most will talk about prime lens only, and with a "slower" 3.4-4.8 lens no less.

if you decide to retexture your walls and retape them down the centers.. mud down on the right of the tape and upward on the left outside of the taped joint then a swift motion down the center of every crack i noticed in your videos. take a chip that is sizable and greater than 1" square on all sides to match the current paint to your local hardware store.

Thank you sir!

I'd like to point out that the first version of the Nikon 43-86 lens was truly bad. Later versions were much better but had a hard time living down the reputation of the early lenses. Good zooms are a result of better coatings which were in their infancy back then. Every glass/air interface resulted in losses of contrast and transmission! Love these videos! The classic old lenses are often overlooked.

The Soligor 28-70/3.9-4.8 is a good one also, it costs usually

Remember, I've used Vivitar lenses with my Oly OM2 in the late seventies. The 28/2.8 and the 70-150/3.8 zoom. Both good performing, specially the 28mm and much cheaper than Zuiko lenses. At that time, they also had the famous Vivitar 283 flash, what nearly everybody bought.

That Nikkor is an updated version. I'm not sure how much it was improved upon but I have the old version and like it, lots of character.

I have the Minolta 28-85 f3.5-4.5. Would you happen to have an idea how it compares to the 28-70 that you review here?

As others have said, there are two versions of that Nikon lens- the older version is the hated one, while the newer version is much better. The older one has the branding and data written inside the filter thread, which is silver in color; the newer one (which appears in this video) has the branding and data outside the filter thread, which is black. AI-converted examples of the old one exist, so the presence of an AI aperture ring isn't a reliable spotting feature in this case.

Thanks for the review. I got a Vivitar 75-205 f/3.8 lens used but like new in the box; and whenever I try to turn the aperture ring or black lever on the mount nothing happens visually in the lens.... Does it mean my lens is bad? Thanks...

Before I go to bed tonight, I swear to Almighty Zeus that I will find a way to use the phrase "in all its short zoom sumptuousness."

How do you get those vintage lenses to focus on infinity on Nikon D700 body?

Hi! How would you Honiara H free minolta 28-70mm vs 35-70mm? Thank you

Will all the lenses mentioned with the exception of the Kiron, ONLY mount to mirror less and NOT DSLR?

Element separation can be rescued by putting it either in the oven or a heat gun.

i have vivitar 28mm md mount and i like it. but 28mm nikkor ai is on another level

Whispering Bob Harris look out.

Vidéo très instructive. Merci pour vos impressions. Souhaitant rester sur monture A, justement pour les objectifs Minolta, je cherche un nouveau boitier. Actuellement je suis sur sony A58 et je vise un Sony A77 ou A 77 ii. Auriez-vous des conseils pour l'achat d'un boitier en monture A ? *

You have some strange artefacts shot with your GH2 when moving lenses in front of it. Is it the camera, KZfaq compression or something else I couldn't tell. Other than that, the only mid-range zoom from the film era that I actually liked was the Nikkor 35-70 f2.8 AF, and it was used on the Nikon FM2. Despite it being autofocussing lens, it had quite big ring for manual focussing so it was nice to use. And yeah, pictures shot with that thing where crazy sharp even wide open...

Another great video! Which one has the least amount of CA?

I see the Kiron's on ebay with Canon FD mounts. A Canon FD lens will not stop down manually if put on, say a Fuji body. So, the question is, do I need to buy Kiron Olympus mount or other to get a manual aperature?

Some of the more "expensive" (still under 100) are Canons FD zooms. There's some crazy expensive stuff there sure but two really good ones that can be had for cheap often are the 35-105mm f3,5 (usually in the higher two digits, got mine for 80 in mint) and the 70-210mm f4. This are my personal recommendations

That's a lens size that's more or less absent from my collection. I do have a sunagor 28 80. Superzoommegarange. It's a bit odd. Its wide to stand back macro.

I use old autofocus film lenses on my old Pentax DSLR 's I use a old Pentax Takumar autofocus 28- 80 mm lens on my * istDL and a Sigma 28-70 mm autofocus on my Pentax K 100D both lenses I bought used for $ 25.00 each and I use them almost daily on my cameras

Too bad that the documentary is "unavailable in my area" and I don't have VPN.

That Nkon lens has a definite cult following. The first edition was and still is terrible, but Nikon made improvements and brought out the second edition and it still is one of the best lenses in its class. There's a certain branch of the film photography community who love the first edition and embrace all of it's faults.

Hello there, Thanks for this video. I have a minolta sr1, and I am wondering, if I buy the Nikon lens you mentioned here, is there any possibility to find a converter ring to place the lens on the camera? I tried to google it, but I did not find anything which is surprise me. Do you know if there is any option? The Nikon 43-86mm f3.5 needs a nikon F mounth, isn't it? Many thanks: Tamas

06:18

Hi Nigel, and thank you for your videos. I always find them interesting and well made. And I like your calm and thorough style. I'd like to ask you something: I recently came across a Minolta 28-70mm f5.5-4.8 on ebay. It looks really nice, but I noticed that the iris blades are kind of non aligned; it's like, when you stop it down, the hole shape is irregular. How big of a problem do you think this could be? Thanks for your suggestions. S.

Kiron lenses are VERY underrated. I have one of their super-zooms, it is like 28-200 or something. Crazy sharp for a zoom.

I have Vivitar 28-50mm f3.5-4.5 I bought for 30 USD, and probably the lens I love most, almost so much so my girlfriend get jealous 😉

̶I̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶M̶i̶n̶o̶l̶t̶a̶ ̶:̶ ̶)̶ No.. 35 - 70.. ...I think I have the Vivitar...and the Kiron.. One Vivitar that surprised me.. 100 -200mm

Ooo!

Is that a GH2 on the table? Just wondering.

The problem I find is suitable adapters , a nightmare!

Hallelujah! Finally someone is putting to bed the myth of old kit zoom lenses being the poor relation of the prime. Primes are great, and I love the discipline of shooting with them, however zooms allow me to go out and take photographs without being burdened down with other lenses. They are great lenses to actually use. They may have struggled with light back when only film was available and expensive fast film was the only option, but I can happily shoot my Fuji XT-20 at 1200 iso with no discernable loss of image quality thereby cancelling the main drawback of these lenses. The tiny Zuiko 35-70mm is an absolute gem. Buy them now while they're still cheap.

Could you start cross-posting on LBRY/Odysee? I would like to watch your videos there.

What do mr Nikon guru, Bjørn Rørslett mean about the Nikkor 43-86/3.5 lens www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_02.html#MF43-86

FYI... the Nikon 43-86mm you show here is the second, later version of this lens model. The early version [with face plate markings INSIDE the filter ring] is the one which ranks as the "worst Nikon lens ever made"; but the later Ai version [with face plate markings OUTSIDE the filter ring, S/N 810001 and above] is significantly redesigned and considered just fine, with a unique "look" - as your review verifies. The early version really is quite terrible, with lousy sharpness and hazy contrast, among other drawbacks.

I like your videos but sometimes you're a bit too nice with those lens (every lens is great), e.g. on the first one you say the bokeh is smooth while the image (kzfaq.info/get/bejne/l9aTiLKHprSqpZs.html) shows it has pretty strong highlighting, which is pretty much the opposite of smooth. Also I'm not a big fan of purely technical reviews but I think having a reference shot for sharpness that you do for each lens would help to compare them (specially across videos).

Thank you for the presentation. But, please don't insist so much that they are very cheap lenses. I have used Ebay in several years and I see how the prices of specific lenses have got so much high that are not achievable for many new comer. I cannot find any other reason, except for online reviews.