What 24 mm lens for a Nikon D70s

Oldbones

Oldbones

Suspended / Banned
Messages
422
Edit My Images
Yes
I am using my D70s in an attempt to learn more and progress with the hobby.
Now I know that this is very old tech now, but it still works and gets me out of the house on adventures.
Living on the very rugged east coat of Scotland, so seascapes and nautical subjects will be part of my efforts this year.
Saving for a newer camera, but for now I will explore the D70s.
On it I have a 50mm AF 1:1 8D which works well, also have a Tamron 18/200mm F3.5/6.3 which I have hardly used.
But I am wondering about a 24 mm for this camera, is it even worth considering, Help I still am learning and eventually my head turns to mince when looking and reading all the things on the net.
Or should I get something different on even nothing?
Thank you in Advance
 
Oldbones said:
But I am wondering about a 24 mm for this camera, is it even worth considering, Help I still am learning and eventually my head turns to mince when looking and reading all the things on the net.
Or should I get something different on even nothing?
Thank you in Advance
Click to expand...

It's very hard to justify spending much on this system. I have an IR converted D70, and it's not impressive. Later DSLRs were good, but quite old tech now.

A 24mm lens will be a mildly wide angle equivalent to 36mm on full frame, and while this is useful, it won't get a lot of landscape into the image. I would look for an 18-55 or 18-70 kit lens from the same era as the camera as better value and more versatile, plus better image quality than the tamron. Expect to pay around £50-£60.
 
If you want 35 mm equivalent on a faster lens then the 24 f/2.8 D is okay. But for similar money you could get a 17-50 Tamron or Sigma f/2.8 zoom.

The 20mm f/2.8 D is meant to be better than the 24.

The Nikon f/1.8 wide primes are very good but around £300 each used.

Ancient Mariner's suggestion of a 18-70 is one I'd suggest to. Your camera doesn't correct chromatic abberations, unlike later Nikons, and this lens has very little of them.
 
Despite the old 18-70 being a kit lens, it punches way above its weight. Not the fastest aperture but fast enough for most things. Only parted with mine because I went FF.
 
A lens I was impressed with when I had Canon APS-C DSLR's was the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 especially considering it was cheap. There was a similar Sigma 18-50mm f2.8. They both seem to be available used at reasonable prices and might be worth looking at. Or just use the 18-200mm.
 
Yardbent said:
this review might help you decide


Nikon 12 - 24 mm f/4, Tokina 12 - 24 mm f/4, Sigma 10 - 20 mm f/4 - 5.6 and Tamron 11 - 18 mm f/4.5 - 5.6.
Click to expand...

I'd be a little cautious with taking too much note of Mr. Rockwell, having once bought a recommended lens (Nikkor 28-200 IIRC, I should have known better) that is actually a piece of garbage. But he does provide useful information as a starting point for further research.
 
I have a vgc Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6, with hood, caps, HOYA Pro-1 UV, and padded case

no longer in use

If you can wait 24hrs, I will post a listing in Classifieds

tn__DSC5967.JPG
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
I'd be a little cautious with taking too much note of Mr. Rockwell, having once bought a recommended lens (Nikkor 28-200 IIRC, I should have known better) that is actually a piece of garbage. But he does provide useful information as a starting point for further research.
Click to expand...


If you know enough to sort KR's crap from the occasional good, you don't need his advice. IMO!
 
Nod said:
If you know enough to sort KR's crap from the occasional good, you don't need his advice. IMO!
Click to expand...

ancient_mariner said:
.................. But he does provide useful information as a starting point for further research.
Click to expand...
exactly why he is useful for a newcomer
also there are other reviewers to provide a balanced viewpoint
 
I bought a secondhand Sigma 10-20. Very pleased with it and it gets the grey matter working to get the best from a wide angle lens, even on a crop body.
I find it too wide for lots of landscapes because it shows so much of the foreground, you really have to work on the composition and have something of interest near the camera.
I don't use it that often but it is a great nice to have item.
However if you don't use the 18-200 at 18 or 24 then you will be better off saving the money.
:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top