Thanks for sharing - good you got a good copy 👍

Thank you for sharing Justin!

Thank you kindly!

Thank you 🙏🏻 for sharing

it's worth every penny.

Thank you Henry! What always strikes be about this lens is how light it is! And I keep thinking - it cannot be that light and good at the same time. But then I look at the images it produces, and I stand corrected. The only major issue is CA, but there are ways around that in LR. Best of luck with your copy!

👌

Thank you Ed! And thanks for sharing!

Thank you AA1PR, much appreciated!

Thank you! Hope the 28-105 will serve you well!

👍

Thanks you! 🙏🏻

Thank you for sharing - the low weight is also one of my favorite features with this lens.

Yes, if you are willing to buy used and accept that newer is not necessarily better, then you can get top gear on a budget! Sounds like you made some great deals!😃

Could not agree more! Thanks 🙏🏻 for sharing!

If it has almost no CA then you have certainly been lucky! My copy has so much of it that it's almost funny 😄- but great to learn that some copies does not have this issue 🤗👌

@@frederikboving CA was of my greatest concern and the first I tested on this particular specimen. As you said, obviously I was very lucky 🍀

@@black-and-light 👌💪

Thank you for your kind words Terry! Yes, this lens is a hidden gem in the Nikon lineup if you ask me - not perfect, but then again, who's perfect? But perfect for me as a light walkaround lens that yields excellent results.

@@frederikboving Hi Frederik - Just wanted to thank for your reply. They are always so greatly appreciated. Just another small, although hopeful, example of possible positive change when considering what we have experienced in society's current / rapidly declining civility. After all - all we really have is each other. Sorry, I just got a little carried away there. Anyway, in case we don't communicate before the end of the year, thanks again for your return correspondence and Kathy and I hope for an absolutely great upcoming holiday season for you and yours. Terry

@@terencedebruycker3840 Thank you Terence! Great upcoming holiday seasons for you and yours as well! It is very kind of you!

Hi Sammy, and thank you for your kind words! The first test (lens sharpness at varying apertures) was shot using a Nikon D750. I think in future videos I will briefly present how I test, i.e. using a Nikon D750, a tripod, a flash in TTL mode, no ambient light, etc. But in general I use the Nikon D750 as my test workhorse, as the 24 MP allows me to zoom in a lot and still have details.

Thanks for sharing 👍

Thank you Greg! "I definitely have a soft spot for lenses that over-perform for their price point, and this is definitely one of those lenses." - that is a really good way of wording the message that I try to get across. The 35-135 is noted. I enjoy the 28-105 for now, but GAS will soon come along... :-D

The 35-135 comes from a generation before (F4), it is the AF version of the MF 35-135 and rock solid metal, while the 28-105 comes from the "more plastic generation", but is still reasonable as a middle class standard zoom. The 28-105 is more versatile and compact, and it sits on my F4 and D3.

Glad you now use the lens a lot! It really deserves to be used! Thanks for sharing 🙏🏻

It depends if you need the wider range - difficult for me to assess; depends on your needs.

It certainly is a light lens, so I hope you will enjoy it 🙂

Hi James, Your story confirms to me that this lens is something extraordinary in terms of price/performance - thanks for sharing!

Hi Nadeem, and thank you for your kind words! First, I do not comment on color rendition because it is super subjective IMHO. I like Nikon and I think they deliver pretty consistent across all lenses. Tony has a video about color science and he has investigated the issue systematically and I can recommend to watch this video: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e7OWdqemz7fdp40.html. I have never noticed that the 28-105 on my D750 (FF, 24MP) came up short (relative to shooting on my D700), but mind you that I have not been looking for this systematically. I did two very unscientific test shots here: www.flickr.com/gp/frederikboving/5645vA (the last two in the album) and I think the 28-105 hold up good considering it is in competition with the notorious Tokina 100mm! The 28-105 is a great walk around general purpose lens, but I would lever use this lens for say product shoots or portraits - here I would always pick a prime. Not that the 28-105 is bad, a prime is just better. Micro contrast - challenge accepted! Will revert!

@@frederikboving very helpful - thank u- I have a D750 and a Df

@@nadeemafzal8984 🤩 Uh, a Df! Such a nice camera but also so expensive!

@@frederikboving it was very expensive I only picked up because of a deal re box damage etc - but loved it from day 1

@@frederikboving ooops could not write the whole message My 28-105 has arrived and it’s awesome just as u described - this is a solid metal lens - u didn’t tell me that - absolutely amazing on the D750

Hi Anas, thank you for your kind words! My experience with lack of VR is that it is a factor to consider when shooting with long lenses (like 180 mm), but for 28-105 I manage fine without VR. I usually find a lamppost to lean the lens against or a fence to rest my elbow on, so that I minimize camera shake. I don't have the 24-120 lens unfortunately, but it seems like a good lens based on this review: photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-24-120mm-f4g-vr/4 - nobody's perfect, and this lens is no exception, but if you can live with the drawbacks as described in the review, then this could be the walk around lens you are looking for! All the best!

@@frederikboving I own both lenses and the 28-105 is about half the size of the 24-120 with noticeably less distortion on each end. There is some CA but as stated it is correctable. I'm an old school old guy and having the semi-macro at my fingertips is VERY convenient. I consider this lens the handiest lens in my kit which also includes the 35-105 push-pull zoom which is a better made lens that this one. That being said, this lens is made like the old E lenses in the 80s and there are plenty of those still working for a living. To that end I'm looking to obtain a second copy to warehouse.

@@jamesoliver6625 Hi James! Thank you for sharing!

If it is a DF or D750 you have, I do not think VR is a huge problem for you. I have both. They easily go to ISO3200. DF to ISO6400. So i could have 1/50. I tested 28-105mm with both during night on purpose. It was quite alright.

I have no first hand experience of the N90 but I think the answer to your question is yes.

Good points! Thanks 🙏🏻 for sharing 👍

Thank you Felix! Landscape lens - it depends a bit on whether you like primes or zooms? And if you want the lens to go very wide? I have a playlist with lens reviews here: kzfaq.info/sun/PLPjooVCTLG920cfFIaNGqxEz5nzhRhtA3 - there are several good lenses in that list that potentially could serve you well as a landscape lens. I enjoy shooting landscapes with 180mm and 135mm for example - a bit unusual many will say. But I of course also shoot with the 24mm, which is very good if you want to have a large field of view. Hope this helps!

@@frederikboving What do you think about the older Nikkor AF 75 - 300 1:4,5 - 5,6 ? I would be able to pick one for a reasonable price.

@@kainer2661 Right. I have no experience with this specific lens, but I often find that I agree with Ken Rockwell. Have a look here: kenrockwell.com/nikon/75300.htm#perf - I think his main complaint is that AF is a bit slow, but otherwise he is a happy camper. Hope this helps!

Thank you for sharing Mjak! Sounds like you have a lot of experience with this lens! My main gripe with this lens is the CA when shooting into the sun. Absolutely horrible, but can vary a lot from copy to copy. All the best!

I've sold the 35-70. Technically it was a better lens but heavy as I don't know what! The 28-105 is super light and produces beautiful images. It has tons of CA so if you shoot in high contrast the lens is absolutely horrible but otherwise it is light and versatile without breaking the bank!

@@frederikboving Thanks for responding! Yes! I think I’m gonna go the same route, especially since both lenses share that macro function. The weight and bulk of the 35-70, especially mounted on the D700 is a bit much for long walks so it winds up staying home more and more. Will have to look out for the CA but it’ll probably get more use than my 35-70. Love your channel. Keep up the good work! I’ve learned a lot from watching the last year or so.

I do not know which 28-85 you are referring to (think there are many), but the 28-105 I believe was a kit lens. So sample variation is high - you have to look carefully to get a good copy that does not have "strange" features like sharp in one side and unsharp in the other etc. And the 105 suffers from massive CA. But if you do find a good copy, it is cheap and light. I seem to remember that the 28-85 I once had (kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mZ2Tl9GnxNCWdmw.html) was very well built but also much heavier. So if built quality is important to you, i'd go with the 28-85.

@@frederikboving I guess the non AF version of tbe 28-85 was the one you reviewed.

@@bradl2636 it was, yes

Hi Kevin, thank you for your feedback! I shot the pictures hand held, with ambient light (rather constant though) and to avoid camera shake I kept the shutter at 1/100 or thereabout. Not lab conditions, but conditions that are close to how I use the camera in real life. So the high ISO was simply to keep the shutter at 1/100th. So inspired by your feedback, I re-did the first test with a tripod, ISO 200, shutter at 1/160th, and varied the aperture as this was the purpose of the first test. TTL flash provided the necessary light I hope - maybe it struggled a bit with the high F-stops. Camera in manual mode. Zoom constant as well. The result is here: www.flickr.com/gp/frederikboving/dG1tL8 - I hope the link works (flicker is not my stronghold). All the files have been processed the same way in LR, I have enabled the lens corrections and I have hit the auto button in LR in the basics panel. And then exported the files as JPGs. There are 8 files with sample shots. The only change from the video is that the euro bill now also has a magnet to hold it steady and I removed the coin. I think the conclusion is the same for the aperture test, that the lens does a pretty good job, also fully open, although it gets sharper and sharper even at F-stops in the 20ties. Let me know if you can access the files and what you make of it. If I was to criticize my test, I would point to the fact that I did not test the lens at varying focal lengths. But then it would have been an even longer video / test. And I probably also should have micro adjusted the AF, or focused manually, so I guess you can go on and on until you end up at DXO mark. Hope this helps.

@@frederikboving Hello Frederik, I am glad you took the feedback positively and I appreciate your time and effort in the lab test. Thank you very much. From what I observed in the pictures you have uploaded in Flickr, the lens has soft characteristics in the left frame when it was shot wide opened. This is what I gathered from several photography forums. It gets better when it is stopped down to f7.1 onwards. I am still considering whether to purchase this lens or not. To be honest, your video peaked my interest in this lens.

Sorry to hear that! When I buy used on the internet, I deal with pro's. That way, I am sure I can return the goods if I am not happy with the purchase. I am not sponsored by mpb.com, but I do recommend them, just to mention one. When you buy from an amateur, you are not as well protected as you are when you buy from a pro - at least that is the legislation here in Denmark, and I would imagine it is the same in many other countries.

Trying to save $20 by not using a camera store ...

@@victorboucher675 yes it became an expensive experience. i would like to get it passed on to another photographer who is not so pernittengryn but i will not do it without telling the thruth.

Oh, lens evaluation is a big subject. I always buy from professionals so I can return the goods if I am not happy with the product. I would look for fungus and test the lens for CA, but IMHO you really don't know the lens until after a few weeks of shooting.

The exact same question i had. My advise apart from the physical condition of the lens, u can also check the fungus , haze or dust by pointing your phone flash at the lens wide open. Check the autofocus if its working fine .. And take a pic at 28 mm and 105mm at minimum and max aperture settings. Then compare the centre and all four corners for sharpness.

I am too lazy to test proper (so I am here!) and for me the proof is in the print. If YOU like it then it is good.

New old stock is a great thing - thank you for sharing Johnny! My D4 felt exactly like that (13t on the clock and not a scratch!).

Uh, I am not an F80 expert, but as far as I can google (imaging.nikon.com/lineup/filmcamera/slr/f80/) it looks like the F80 has a built in AF motor, and then it should work. But better be safe than sorry and ask someone who knows for sure that the F80 has the classic AF motor that works with AF lenses.

Thank you for sharing!

I recently picked one up for my d700 I love it

Yes, but to be honest it's Made In China junk, I wouldn't even consider it.

@@arunphillips6977 i get great results...i don't care where its made. i use russian glass and all kinds of vintage nikkor Ai

Hi Andy, I only have the AIS version of the 28-85mm and not the AF-D. You can find a little bit of testing of this lens 12 minutes into this video: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sNmeeblirc2ad3U.html If the AF-D version is a heavy and solid as the AIS version, then I cannot imagine the 28-105 is worth double the price. It was after all a super mass produced kit lens back in the days, and albeit an excellent lens, I have a hard time imagining it can justify the price difference, unless of course you need the extra reach.

Right! I fully agree that the minimal focus distance is important - when doing especially flower photography or macro photography, I always struggle with the lens' ability to focus close up. A factor that is not always addressed in lens reviews!

@@frederikboving exactly. There was a period a lot of AIs lens has "Macro" mode. Some of them can get really close. Like 0.27m. same as a model 18-35G. I really appreciate this kind of settings.

Right. Would it not be fair to turn the last part around and say that new Z cameras won’t focus with this lens?

You are certainly right there - I was just pointing out the upgrade path...

@@user-zv6qu4ks1p Very high quality. I bought this lens but it hasn’t been delivered yet

flic.kr/p/2jiUDsK flic.kr/p/2jiTuWy flic.kr/p/2jiCNE8 flic.kr/p/2jgNKqA flic.kr/p/2jfv9uP flic.kr/p/2jfxSVj flic.kr/p/2je28Ep flic.kr/p/2jdvbta

Thanks for sharing!

I have seen many of TAPs videos, and I find him hard to follow in the sense that he presents his results but not his process, i.e. how he tests. So I am inspired by what he says but never really convinced. This guy: photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso I think explains it well. And I don't understand why people are not convinced when they see the same picture with same bokeh and field of view, and the one taken with the APS-C is is adjusted both in aperture and focal length (and ISO). Instead, some - even Peter McKinnon (!!) - says that full frame has more background blur! How can a sensor have more blur? It records the light it gets. It is because the APS-C is shooting at a higher aperture when comparing same f-stops, and we all know that gives greater depth of field. But I guess this discussion will never end.

Thanks for sharing Ivan, you obviously have a less complicated relationship with CA than I do!

I shop at mpb.com - they are not the cheapest, but they are easy to do business with and in my experience their rating of the condition of the products they sell is spot on and very fair. No, I am not sponsored. You can also try Finnish camerastore.com - It's been a while since I did business with them, but they have a large number of items on stock so there is lots to choose from.

@@frederikboving your so kind to take the time to reply Hi from Ireland 🇮🇪 and keep the vids coming

@@lusean193 Thank you William! Will do!

180 day return and actual photo of the item being sold. That is what I require. I will pay for service - these people bragging about saving $20 or so for a click bait title on Tube - live & learn.

24... never a general purpose lens, that needs at least a 20.

I look for (1) general impression - many scratches etc indicating a tough life? Test the focus ring - should be smooth with no "funny" sounds. (2) fungus and dust (may not significantly impact image quality but always good to avoid if possible) and (3) sharpness - some copies have elements out of line and hence one part of the image may be sharp whereas the other is soft, even though you have shot a brick wall straight on. So do some "technical" shots to test the lens sharpness. Disclaimer: this is what I look for; the list may not be complete relative to personal preferences.