Nikon 35-70 f3.3-4.5 Macro AIS lens - experiences?

I had/have the AF version of the lens. If the optics are the same it is a decent lens (bought mine for $89.00). But, mine exploded in my hands a couple of months ago while tring to zoom. The zoom had gotten stiffer recently and I forced it (too hard apparently). It had seen hard use over the past several years - so I got my money's worth out of it. Replaced it with a Sigma 28-105mm F2.8-4.0 ASP - which is as good or better optically and SEEMS to be more robust mechanically. You may want to consider the Sigma - greater range and 1 f/stop faster.

I guess I should clarify this posting. I am NOT interested in any other lenses similar to this, including the newer AF version. Just this one specific lens, the AIS 35-70 f 3.3-4.5, manual focus. It is the right range and size for my needs. My hope is that it might be of better quality than some of the newer lenses. It isn't available for me to look at here where I live, so I am trying to get some first-hand experiences. But thanks for trying to help me out!

I bought the MF version used 6 or 7 years ago and have been quite satisfied with the handling and the sharpness. No scientific testing, though. Mine looked very worn when I bought but has held up quite well and slides using it are sharp and show good contrast. All of the AIS lenses are very solidly built. The edges go a tiny bit soft at wide angles and large apertures. The only fussiness is the problem of using a variable-aperture lens with a manual-exposure camera(FM,FM2n). It's more agreeable on the FA with aperture priority. Attaching a lens shade for a 35mm (HN-3)helps control flare, but it isn't great shooting into the light. As a one-lens kit it's acceptable, but many times I wish it went wider than 35mm. Macro is optimistic; the closet focusing distance is 1.1 feet.

Given that it was designed as a "budget" lens the Nikkor 35-70mm/f3.3-4.5 performs really very well. Sharpness and contrast are more than sufficient for excellent 7"x10" prints and should be good enough for 11"x14", colour is not different from other Nikkors, distortion is virtually non-existent (I used it for architecture). The macro feature must have been forced in by the marketing division, however, because it gets fuzzy rather than sharp at close distances (or did I get a lemon?). Mechanically it is hardly different from the "pro" Nikkors of the golden 80es, and I think Nikon maintained that standard for the MF lenses.

If you are refering to the mid-80 model with all metal body weighing abt 700g, 67mm filter size then it is a very good one. I'm using one since '84 and till now I enjoy most of the pictures taken. Even comparing with some 'better' lenses I acquired later.

Sharpness, contrast, color and flare are all well above average.

Focusing can be easy and accurate. First focus at 70mm then compose and take light measurement.

However, I have no experience with the macro. Cannot comment.

Go for it if you come across one.

Thanks again for the responses, guys! Yes, I figured that because this is an AIS lens, quality would be much better than the current "consumer" lenses. This one takes 52mm filters, is about 2.7" long, weighs 9 oz.

Great little lens, and in fact the only zoom lens I kept, next to several primes. Nice travel lens. Good images even wide open throughout the zoom range. Does not support being closed down a lot; beyond f/11 quality degrades a lot. Nice lens for close-ups too and even works well on a short extension tube. The only drawback I see is barrel distortion at 35 mm which will be really obvious in some landscape shots. Also for use on my FM2N I'd like a lens which wasn't variable-aperture, especially for flash photography. Otherwise I'm very happy with mine, which I bought new about 5 years ago.

Jim, What a phenomenal little lens! For years I only shot with a few lenses: 24/2.8, 35-105/3.5-4.5 and 80-200/4, all Nikkors, and was very satisfied. A few years ago I tried a used Nikkor MF 35-70/3.5-4.5 AIS and was impressed. What Mark said is accurate, however unless strait lines are important, I wouldn't worry about distorsion. At f8 and f11 in particular, this lens performs excellent!I bought a new one right away (B&H; $250) and it has replaced my 35-105 entirely. Macro works well too and I sometimes add the 4T. Presently I own a few more lenses, macro etc. but the 35-70 has won a high place on my list. I've seen used ones in mint condition for around $100; also MF one is not identical to same AF; check www.photodo.com for some more. Limited range? not enough of this or that? I still think it's a gem. cheers! Sorin

Sorry, made an error. Indeed, I am reffering to 35-70/3.3(not 3.5)-4.5 Macro AIS. Sorin

I recently bought this lens (used, in obviously very good condition) and just took a couple of test films. I'm utterly disappointed by its performance (sharpness and contrast) at full aperture, especially at 35 mm. Miles behind my primes, but miles behind my Series E 75-150, too! At medium apertures it performs reasonable. Construction employs a lot of plastic but it is nicely crafted.

Jim, I purchased this small, handy manual lens last year from B&H and used it for about 90% of my shots on a trip last year to Yellowstone/Grand Teton. I was quite happy with the quality, even though most shots were at f/16. The lens was used on an FM2N, loaded with Kodachrrome 64, with the camera mounted on a solid tripod. I'll echo the comments of some others that the variable aperture can be annoying on the FM2N at times. If you're shooting landscapes, as I was for the most part, there is no problem. On the other hand, if you are shooting a subject that moves about in varying light you may experience a lot of frustration, especially if you are using slide film without much exposure latitude. With an automatic exposure camera you should have no problems. As you can expect from the light weight of the lens, there is a lot of plastic construction, but it seems to be well done. The lens is sturdy and operates smoothly. One other consideration is that the lens has a two-touch construction, which can be slightly awkward to someone who is used to a one-touch zoom lens such as an old 43-86 Nikkor, as I was.

I also have this lens for many years, I think the sharpness and color fidelity are very good, especially sharpness, I also think because of the hand heldable weight of this lens, it certainly helps the sharpness in terms of reducing of vibration. It is a wonderful lens, do not let the apperance or price fool you, I also believe 35-70 zoom range serves a very practical purpose for street/travel type photography, you certainly will not have the long range zoom, but it gives you good perspective and last minute adjustment if the situation call for a little bit cropping of the image. It is wonderful transition lens between a fix focus and zoom lens.