These Nikon's lenses ok?
 

Hi all, soon to purchase a Letus35 or SGpro,for use with a DVX100AE , I have the chance to buy 2 Nikon lenses for approx $160 USD or 85 GBP
Nikon AF 28-80m 1:3.3-5.6 G
Nikon AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 G
would love to hear comments, pro's / con's
or what kind of shots these lenses would be suitable for

cheers :) Russ

Well, the 28-80 will suit you for anything from semi-wide to close-up shots. The 70-300mm will be good if you are shooting things from very far away. Otherwise it is overkill. A 300mm lens with an adapter is probably a waste for most purposes. I think I have the same 28-80mm lens you listed. It works well, I'd say. Kind of a slow lens, but not bad. Breathes a bit much, but it is a cheaper lens. Not bad overall.

Hi Mike cheers for the quick reply ,what do you mean it breathes a bit much Im kinda new to the 35mm side of things

ta Russ

Due to the expense in building "high quality" zoom lenses, the ones we typically have access to make many compromises to achieve optimal images throughout their zoom range.

1. They are generally slower lenses, requiring more source light than the more expensive versions.

2. The breathing mentioned earlier regards the effect where images appear to grow or shrink in size during rack focusing. Expensive cinema zoom lenses (manufactured with many internal corrective optical elements to extremely high tolerances) minimize this breathing (almost) completely.

3. Prime lenses are usually better in almost every way than any zoom equivalent. Less CA, barrel distortion, better light transmission, etc.

Recommendation, although not always practical:
If you have to zoom, do it by moving the CAMERA.

Russell.

If you are going to buy the lenses anyway, then go ahead.

Eventually, these lenses may find a home in a dark cupboard or hit the marketplace again if you move on to buy f1.8 fixed primes when you have finessed your adapter and your own skills to use it.