Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8 Zoom Lens Review

Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8 Zoom Lens Review

2800 1575 Jeb Inge

In the mid-1980s, the photography industry was at the beginning of a massive tectonic shift, and there was one question on everyone’s mind. Would professionals buy into the new technology? It’s a question that had been asked before, like when purely mechanical cameras were superseded by cameras with battery-dependent electronics, or with the development of auto-exposure programming modes. But when Minolta released the first camera with integrated autofocus and motorized film advance in 1985, it was clear that this would be a much bigger leap into the future.

The same period in which autofocus was making its big splash also played host to another more quiet revolution. Zoom lenses, which had nearly always lagged behind their prime siblings in image quality, were starting to close the gap. Manufacturers like Nikon and Canon were improving their telephoto zooms year after year, while a partnership between Leica and Minolta had also birthed some high-quality zooms. Even third-party manufacturers like Vivitar were releasing surprisingly excellent zoom lenses. 

For Nikon, these two imaging trends would collide in 1987 with the release of the AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8. Released in conjunction with the 80-200mm f/2.8 AF telephoto zoom, the 35-70mm was a statement to professionals. Nikon was signalling a commitment to zooms, releasing two that weren’t just convenient for the working photographer, but also delivered the quality they demanded.

This “normal zoom” would continue to be produced throughout the 1990s, and would become a staple in the kit of hundreds (if not thousands) of newsroom photographers and independent working professionals. Many of the reasons it was popular then make it valuable today; extremely high build quality, fast maximum aperture, sharpness, and lack of distortion. And while it’s true that the 35-70mm would eventually be usurped by zoom lenses with a wider focal range, this fact also means it can be bought today for bargain prices. In fact, it wouldn’t be going too far to call this the best value in autofocus zoom lenses today.

Background on the AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8

The AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8 debuted in 1987 one year after Nikon released its first autofocus SLR, the F-501 (or N2020). While that camera wasn’t going to win over Nikon’s demanding professional customers, it did signal Nikon’s intent to enter the autofocus market. The 35-70mm was Nikon’s first truly professional piece of equipment, meant to whet the whistle one year before they released their groundbreaking flagship camera, the Nikon F4. In it’s day, it made jaws drop. With its maximum aperture of f/2.8 it was the fastest mid-range zoom lens ever created. Canon wouldn’t release a similar lens for two more years. Minolta customers would have to wait five.

Lenses with maximum apertures of f/3.5 suddenly felt glacially slow and those with variable maximum apertures were left in the dust. It was a game changer at the time, and yet something we don’t even think about today.

The 35-70mm has 15 elements in 12 groups, with a 7-bladed diaphragm, is multi-coated and has macro capability when fully extended. It stops down to f/22 and can focus as close as two feet from the subject. The first iteration of the lens, designated “AF” was produced from 1987 until 1992, when Nikon added distance coding to assist with flash photography and therefore created the “AF-D.” (Other small changes also were made to the aperture lock and later to the distance chip.) The lens reviewed for this article is of the “AF” variety and came off the line in the early years of production.

The 35-70mm is compatible with every Nikon camera, only sacrificing autofocusing abilities on the lowest-tier DX cameras. 

Compared to the modern 24-70mm behemoths Nikon currently sells, the 35-70mm looks small and unimpressive. And while it’s true that in its most compact form, this lens has the dimensions roughly equivalent to a can of soda, picking it up belies visual impressions. The lens has more weight than expected — made almost entirely out of metal and glass, it weighs in at a not insubstantial 23.4 ounces. It doesn’t seem like much on its own, but attached to a full frame SLR or DSLR, it’s a workout. If Thor carries a massive axe called Sormbreaker, a photographer carrying this lens on an F4s would be wielding Wristbreaker. It’s hard to imagine carrying around anything bigger all day without some sort of orthopaedic miracle.


Advantages abound for this lens. Let’s start with what we can see and feel.

Build quality is outstanding. While camera bodies and lenses were beginning their transition into overly-plasticized construction, this lens was still firmly planted in the era of metal. The AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8 is built for professionals. As such, it’s designed to take a beating. The lens zooms in and out with ease, but not so loosely to ever cause worry about sliding out of the desired focal length. The rubber grip rings feel as durable as the metal body. The aperture ring clicks firmly into place, locking at f/22 with an unlocking button slightly above and to the right of the wheel.

It’s not a beautiful lens — certainly not something you would put on display. Instead it has the appearance of something begging to be out in the worst environment you can find. It’s not waterproof, and the push-pull design can allow dust inside, but the copy used for this review — among the oldest of these lenses — is pristine inside after roughly thirty years of use.

The lens’s image quality is a direct reflection of the leaps and bounds manufacturers were making with zoom lenses.

Vignetting is at its most noticeable at f/2.8 and 35mm. At that focal length, it is reduced at f4, almost gone at f/5.6 and completely gone by f/8. At the 50mm length it is less intense at f/2.8 and gone by f/5.6. At 70mm vignetting is the least noticeable of all the focal ranges at f/2.8 and gone by f/5.6. But the only time this vignetting is truly noticeable, and even then against a blank wall, is at f/2.8 at 35mm. Even then, it would actually improve environmental portraits, which is the most imaginable use for such exposure settings.

As can be expected from any zoom lens, sharpness isn’t quite on the level of any of the focal lengths as prime lenses, but matches performance in certain areas. Center-image sharpness is fantastic through the entire focal range. At 35mm results on the edge are very soft at f/2.8, and don’t sharpen to perfection until f/8. At 50mm, corner sharpness is very good except at f/2.8 and (to a lesser extent) at f/4. At 70mm, corner sharpness is outstanding from f/22 to f/8, acceptable at f/5.6 and f/4 and soft wide open.

Distortion is almost non-existent as are chromatic aberrations. To the degree that anyone would purchase a zoom lens based on bokeh, the 35-70mm isolates all subjects at f/2.8, though it couldn’t be called dreamy, creamy or even attractive. 

Sharpness samples below – click desired focal length and aperture for full size samples.

35mm at f/2.8, at f/4, at f/5.6, at f/8, at f/11, at f/16, at f/22

50mm at f/2.8, at f/4, at f/5.6, at f/8, at f/11, at f/16, at f/22

70mm at f/2.8, at f/4, at f/5.6, at f/8, at f/11, at f/16, at f/22

As already mentioned, the lens does have heft to it when attached to a big camera and would make smaller ones quite long in the nose. But compared with modern zooms, or even other zooms in this lens’s immediate family, it’s still a welterweight (though it should be considered the Manny Pacquiao of welterweight lenses.)

All the aforementioned advantages are amplified when considering one of the lenses most impressive features; its price. While the other lenses that made up Nikon’s “journalist trinity” in the 1990s — the 20-35mm and 70-200mm f/2.8 — still command prices in the $300 to $900 range, an AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8 in good condition can be had (almost always) for less than $200. Often they sell at auction for below $100. The lens used in this review was purchased for $85. That looks pretty good when compared  to the $1,900 it takes to own Nikon’s newest 24-70mm f/2.8. In fact, you could buy all three of the 1990s Nikon trinity set for about $750 less than a single lens today.

Real World Image Samples


There aren’t many disadvantages to this lens. The most glaring of these few is its susceptibility to flaring. 

Anyone who’s used a 24-70mm lens will immediately feel constrained by the narrower focal range. That’s not something to blame the lens or the company for, a 35-70mm was standard in the mid-eighties. But if you’re a photographer who frequently operates on the 24-35mm range, you’ll need to carry extra glass. That could be one prime lens, or Nikon’s 20-35mm f/2.8, a lens equal in quality to the 35-70mm but with a higher price.

Lens creep, or when the lens slips out of its focal position, is typical to almost every lens with a push-pull design. Creep does occur with this lens to a small degree, and it can be annoying. But it rarely happens when the lens is attached to the camera and can often be solved with a sturdy rubber band.

Lastly, the 62mm filter ring rotates as the lens focuses. It’s not really a problem until you’re using a polarising filter or an external “Cokin-esque” system where focusing and composing simultaneously quickly becomes annoying.


It’s not clear whether the macro capability should be considered an advantage or a disadvantage. In the sense that it has it rather than lacks it, the feature is an advantage. To use the macro function, the lens must be extended to 35mm, at which point a button below the “AF NIKKOR” badging is pushed and the grip twisted to allow for manual focusing.

But in practical use, this macro functionality isn’t terribly useful. Most of all because getting that close to a subject at that focal length cuts down considerably on the light hitting the subject. With its 1:4 reproduction ratio, some macro purists may not even consider it a truly macro lens, which it wasn’t designed to be. Considering that Nikon had a dedicated (and quite excellent) autofocus 60mm f/2.8 Micro lens as early as 1989, adding any macro function to the 35-70mm seems more designed to make the already groundbreaking lens more remarkable. It’s not a gimmick, because it technically can be used effectively, but it’s not something anyone asked for nor, in all likelihood, will it be used very much.


Buying this lens should be a no-brainer for any Nikon shooter that doesn’t already have a zoom lens in this focal range. Photographers on a budget or prime lovers looking to start a journey into the zoom world need only look here for their first step.

It’s incredible that a lens with this sort of build quality, toughness and performance is available for such a low price. The same was said here of Nikon’s F100, but bears repeating; it’s downright criminal that something this good costs so little. It’s lighter than modern mid-range professional zooms while nearly matching those far more expensive lens’ image quality, and it has on-lens aperture control. To have all of that at less cost than nearly any zoom lens sold today is remarkable.

We often talk about bargains and value here, but when it comes to this lens, it’s more like a fire sale. The Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8 was in the bags of thousands of photojournalists for more than a decade, and it remains an excellent addition to any Nikon shooter’s bag today.

Buy one on eBay

Buy from our own F Stop Cameras

Follow Casual Photophile on Facebook and Instagram

[Some of the links in this article will direct users to our affiliates at B&H Photo, Amazon, and eBay. By purchasing anything using these links, Casual Photophile may receive a small commission at no additional charge to you. This helps Casual Photophile produce the content we produce. Many thanks for your support.]

Jeb Inge

Jeb Inge is a Berlin-based photographer and writer. He has previously worked in journalism, public history and public relations.

All stories by:Jeb Inge
  • Great review of this underrated lens. I bought the D version back in the late 90’s to use on my N90s for shooting weddings. After I got out of doing photography professionally I stopped using both the lens and the camera and they languished in storage for several years. A couple of years ago I got them both out to start shooting events (protests, parades etc…) and it turns out it’s the perfect combo for fast moving chaotic situations. I recommend getting a cheap auto focus body (like the N90s) to use with this lens. I set my N90s to Program mode and matrix metering and just fire away.

    I find the lens (especially when paired with the N90s) too heavy and bulky for every day carry but for events it’s the first thing I reach for.

  • Really nice pics Jeb!

  • What he said. Especially regarding the flare – can be a mare.
    I have had the AF-D version for a year now, bought from eBay, and pair it with a D810.
    Previously it was on a couple of 7*** series bodies and felt unbalanced but strangely not so much on my FA.
    Metal on metal perhaps?
    I’m also not a fan of the rotating front element. As for the “macro” function, never felt the need.
    I use it as a 50 with legs. If I’m constricted by space or allowed movement.
    Bokeh decent on the long end.
    Can be a bit of a dog at times but the kind that brings help when you’re stuck in the well.
    And you could probably put your feet up on it once you get back home by the fire.
    Solid review.

  • The perfect lens for basketball games from mid-court on my D300 and D7200. Have owned since F4/film days. Unmatched optical and build quality.

  • Very nice review!
    I just got a good deal on one of these (D model) in very nice shape and am looking forward to putting it to good use. I almost bought a 28-70 2.8 af-s but it seemed to have intermittent connection issues with my D750 so I passed on it. I have read that this can be an issue on those (with D750 in particular) and there also seem to be a lot out there with bad af motors. So for 1/3 of the price of the 28-70, it was hard to pass on the 35-70. I already have a 28-300 VR for all around shooting so I figured this would be nice for situations where a 2.8 is needed.
    One thing that I have figured out so far is that it seems like an AF fine tune was helpful on my particular copy. I have it dialed in to +10 on the D750.

  • Enjoyed you review: it contains lots of facts I left out of mine! If you’re interested in how it compares to the 28-80mm, 28-85mm and 28-105mm zooms, here’s the link:

  • Somewhat late to the post but felt I had to add my 10 pennies worth!
    So great Review Jeb.

    I came across these early AF Nikkors by accident, after bidding on a AF Nikkor 35-135 f3.5-4.5 and winning at £30!including delivery!
    I thought I had bought an ancient relic that would have been of little use on a D610, but i did like the 35mm -135mm range?

    Boy was i surprised! supern Micro-contrast and colour and I would concur with everything you have said about the 35-70 its characteristics are identical… yes its heavy, but superbly made mine is a AF-N so just pre-D which is over-hyped anyway.

    So I asked what were the other lenses in the range like ?
    24-50, 28-85, 70-200 etc… well I tracked down for a princely sum £80 an AF 24-50mm, 28-85mm both are simply stunning! the only caveat is they can be slow with min. f3.5 but I have a 50mm f1.8 AF-d for that.

    All have minimal distortion, superb colour, controllable CA at top notch micro-contrast… oh and a Micro-Nikkor 55mm Ai converted c. 1973 the BEST LENS Nikon ever made!
    Just need to find a 20mm Af-N, but they didn’t make one 🙁

  • Great job, very nice review. Some of these older Nikon Nikkor AF & AF-D don’t get the credit they deserve… So this review was needed. Some folks value them too high but most don’t value them enough. I say these lenses demand a more skilled photographer as it now competes with all the amenities of the newer lenses with their VR systems, lighter in weight (plastic body) more tech inside for communicating with the camera. When all the feature go cuckoo on the new lenses is when you’ll wish you had one of these tanks but that’s the thought that always crosses my mind. This lens works as good as the day it was sold.

  • Recently bought a AF-D version of this lens. I am wondering why my copy does make decent to even perfect photos in all kind of circumstances, however a severe de-lamination of certain glass element is visible (and a healthy load of dust). Not so much the well known haze, but a not so nice circulair pattern of bug splash like semi transparant glue. Still… very nice IQ.

  • Had mine for 25 years and more and have never thought of replacing it. Used with D3x and D800e at present. Flare is the only problem in extreme situations. Soft at edges at full aperture but apart from architectural worl this is no problem

  • I bought one new in 2000, so I was using it on film til 2005. From that time I went back and forth between the 35-70 and 28-70 and found any aperture smaller than 2.8 on these lenses are very comparable. Wide open it is sharp but spherical aberration is present like veiling glow, quite nice on people pics. There is no longitudinal CA.

    In studio, at f/8 there is simply nothing left to be desired in terms of sharpness. Very low level of axial CA; easily corrected, and less flare than the 50 1.8D, especially against white backgrounds.

    A very cool feature is the nice stars it makes of specular highlights, even wide open; possible because of its seven straight aperture blades.

    I’ve had a couple of Gen 1 24-70’s also and I still preferred the earlier lenses’ images, but would have liked the wider range, because I do have crop sensor cameras also.
    Just ordered a used 35-70 and I’m hoping it is as good as the other two I’ve had.

    Some believe a 2X zoom isn’t enough, these are snapshot people. There is a big difference in the compression at 35mm and 70mm.

Leave a Reply

Jeb Inge

Jeb Inge is a Berlin-based photographer and writer. He has previously worked in journalism, public history and public relations.

All stories by:Jeb Inge