I'm experimenting with photography and I'm on a budget: I'm using a Nikon D70 and I already have a Nikkor AF 35-105 f/3.5-4.5 macro and a 50 mm f/1.8 E (manual focus).

Now I found a cheap Sigma AF 28-80 f/3.5-5.6, that I understand being a kit lens for older film cameras. The reason I'd like to buy it is to get a slightly wider lens for casual photography.

Is the difference in wide angle worth the purchase? It's also slower on the longer focals, but that's a smaller concern.


To complement your 35-105, I'd suggest a wide angle zoom, like a Sigma 10-20 or Tamron/Nikkor 10-24 or the likes. However, it depends on how much on a budget you are as the Sigma/Tamron are still in the 350-400€ range new (at least).

If those lenses are out of your budget, consider the 18-55 kit lens (VR or not) which is available used at cheap prices (below 100€ used) and has fantastic performance for its price.

| improve this answer | |
  • In fact a 18-55 would be a good idea price-wise. Since the D70 has a built-in AF motor, are there 18-55s without motor? – clabacchio Feb 13 '14 at 13:06
  • As far as I know modern kit lenses have motors (even the 18-70 which was bundled with the D70 itself). You can still use lenses with motors with the D70 and lenses without motor aren't usually significantly cheaper than ones with it (the only exception being the 50mm f/1.8 which is a lot cheaper without).. so I'd ignore the motor issue. – Marco Mp Feb 13 '14 at 13:14

For that small of a gain, you'd probably be better off with a wide angle prime lens. You gain a very minimal amount of additional range and if it is a lens designed for film cameras it is going to have ghosting problems on digital bodies due to the lack of internal anti-reflective coatings.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.