Difference between Nikkor AF-D 28mm f/1.4 and Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f/2 on D810

[Jedi]

Hello!

Can you report, please, your impressions, your opinions, for your personal experience, about the comparison between the Nikkor AF-D 28mm f/1.4 and Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f/2?
Do you prefer Nikon or Zeiss for mountain landascapes and (few) indoor environmental portraits, please?

Nikon 28mm is also famous four its spectacular results in low lights, but Zeiss is Zeiss.....
I would shoot with Nikon D810.

Thank you!!!!

[chambeshi]

i've not tried these Twenty-Eights. But I swear by my Zeiss 15mm f2.8 and 21 f2.8 and 25 f2 Distagons albeit heavy. So I also use the smaller 20mm 4f and 20 f3.5 Nikkors. But a D810 could stretch capabilities of the Nikkors, which are nearly as solidly built as Distagons being "all metal" AI lenses.

However the silkiness of Zeiss MF is a world apart :-)

As emphasized several times (following on the likes of the late great Galen Rowell) these Nikkors are lighter and more compact + they do not flare especially shooting into the sun. The Nikkor AIS Twenty-Eights are also great lenses

Do not overlook this classic pancake 28  :-) it only weighs 180g  with solid performance : Voigtlander Color-Skopar 28mm 2.8 AI-P SLII

some links etc
https://blog.mingthein.com/?s=voitlander+28mm

http://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-carl-zeiss-distagon-2828-t/

https://diglloyd.com/prem/s/ZF/publish/28Distagon.html?dglyPT=true

https://diglloyd.com/prem/s/ZF/publish/28Distagon-compare-Voigtlander28f2_8-PineCreekMine-aerial.html?dglyPT=true

https://diglloyd.com/prem/s/ZF/publish/28Distagon-compare-CottonwoodCanyonFallColor.html?dglyPT=true

https://photographylife.com/lenses/voigtlander-28mm-f2-8-color-skopar-sl-ii

https://joserochaphoto.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/voigtlander-color-skopar-28mm-f2-8-sl-ii-aspherical-review/

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/01/07/a-quick-look-at-the-voigtlander-28-2-8-and-nokton-58-1-4-on-the-nikon-df/

http://www.lenstip.com/369.1-Lens_review-Voigtlander_Color_Skopar_28_mm_f_2.8_SL_II.html


Alternatives
Sony FE 2/28 – The Sony has AF, is faster and it has nicer bokeh. It is also sharper in the extreme corners at f/8 if you don’t correct the distortion, if you do the Zeiss is a little sharper across most of the frame.  The FE 2/28 vignettes a lot and it has very significant distortion. It is a little smaller than the Zeiss Distagon if you include the adapter but twice as expensive. Build quality is no contest, the Zeiss wins. See this post for a comparison of both lenses.
Sony FE 4/16-35 ZA OSS – Four times as expensive, two times as heavy but more flexible because it a zoom and because it is stabilized. Distortion is more pronounced. Sharpness at f/8 is very close with an advantage for the FE Zeiss in the extreme corners.
Olympus OM 3.5/28 – A very small and very affordable lens which is only a little less sharp and contrasty than the Zeiss 2.8/28 but it has less field curvature. Build quality is not as nice as that of the Zeiss.
SMC Pentax K 3.5/28 (52mm filter thread) – Even though it usually sells for half the price of the Zeiss 2.8/28 it comes very close to it in performance. I think the Zeiss is a tad sharper but at f/8 the extreme corners of the Pentax are sharper and it has less CA. Build quality is quite good.
Nikon Ai-S 2.8/28 – I don’t own it but from what I have seen and read it is a little weaker at longer distances. The big advantage of the Nikon is that it has a very short minimal focusing distance and floating elements. So it is much more suited for short distance work.
Also check out this interesting comparison on the a7rII on FM with the Pentax 3.5/28, Olympus 3.5/28 and Nikon AI-S 2.8/28.
The Zeiss Distagon 2.8/28 T* is a very enjoyable lens and well suited for landscape photography.
Few lenses are built as well and handle as nicely as the Zeiss 2.8/28. To me this is an important aspect of a lens. I don’t shoot for money I shoot because I enjoy the process and the end result.
For my landscape photography the Zeiss Distagon 2.8/28 performed very well, by f/8 it is very sharp with the exception of a few pixels in the corners. It handles most back lit situations with ease and because it it doesn’t weight me down much I often have it with me.
Of course it isn’t a perfect lens. While the center is excellent from f/2.8 you should at least stop down to f/5.6 for good corners. Vignetting is also very obvious at f/2.8 and to a lesser degree at f/4. The performance drop at shorter distances is a bit of a letdown.

[Jedi]

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2814af.htm

[Jedi]

i've not tried these Twenty-Eights. But I swear by my Zeiss 15mm f2.8 and 21 f2.8 and 25 f2 Distagons albeit heavy.

Do not overlook this classic pancake 28  :-)
The Zeiss Distagon 2.8/28 T* is a very enjoyable lens and well suited for landscape photography.
Few lenses are built as well and handle as nicely as the Zeiss 2.8/28. To me this is an important aspect of a lens. I don’t shoot for money I shoot because I enjoy the process and the end result.
For my landscape photography the Zeiss Distagon 2.8/28 performed very well, by f/8 it is very sharp with the exception of a few pixels in the corners. It handles most back lit situations with ease and because it it doesn’t weight me down much I often have it with me.
Of course it isn’t a perfect lens. While the center is excellent from f/2.8 you should at least stop down to f/5.6 for good corners. Vignetting is also very obvious at f/2.8 and to a lesser.......

1) Excuse me, but you have said that you haven't tried these lenses!!!!
2) heavy? I use Nikon's 14-24mm, 24-70mm f/2.8 VRII, and 70-200mm f/2.8E FL in my long trekking in the Dolomites!!!!
3) Only Nikon or Zeiss lenses
4) Classic pancake? The actual Nikon pro 28mm is the Nikkor AF-S 28mm f/1.8G: it seems to be a plastic toy: aren't you agree? It seems to be the 18-55mm DX!!!! I want a solid lens in my hands when I shoot, like Zeiss or old metal Nikkor AF-D lenses, or actual Nikon pro zoom lenses
5) Nikon AF-D 28mm f/2.8 isn't a good performer for the quality I want

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Said Rockwell probably haven't used the lens either ...

From my field notes on the 28/1.4 Nikkor it was sharp in the centre even at the wider stops,  vignetting was obvious,  and corners needed stopping down quite a bit more to get even sharpness over the frame. Flare resistance was good but not outstanding and image contrast overall not very high. Background bokeh would be soft and smooth unless the background was of the busy kind. Chromatic aberrations are as expected for a lens of this vintage and might require conversion program treatment. A nice lens for portraits and documentary work, but not a candidate for landscapes. The newer f/1.8 version would be better as it definitively is NOT a "plastic toy".

It has the infamous A/M switching ring design that is susceptible to material fatigue and later cracking up, leading to costly repairs.

Not tried the Zeiss lens.

[chambeshi]

1) Excuse me, but you have said that you haven't tried these lenses!!!!

As I said the Zeiss I have are in a class of their own. I bought Used in near mint at substantial lower cost but they are by no means cheap. And i'm sure from the reliable feedback from the likes of Ming Thein and similar experienced and conscientious bloggers on the www (on which I based my decision) that the 28 Zeiss is no different.

I've only tried the 28 f2.8 AI, which was fine but with latest generation of DSLRs esp Nikon D810 i selected Zeiss. And don't regret it. I don't need AF mF is great for landscapes and closeups. Im most fond of the Tiny Twenties  - tough Nikkor classics and often use them when carrying telephotos etc + carbon fibre monopod or tripod. And as reiterated on NG, the 20 f4 doesn't flare into the sun

2) heavy? I use Nikon's 14-24mm, 24-70mm f/2.8 VRII, and 70-200mm f/2.8E FL in my long trekking in the Dolomites!!!!
 

well, all i can say and I'm not being facetious here - each to their own  Check out the parallel NG thread active over past couple of days on the 300 2.8 and larger. Spells  out outweighing factors

 Telephotos tip the balance of the kit one can lug especially in hills and higher. And my choices in central Africa are tempered by the heat etc. It will literally kill many people if they don't treat tropical landscapes with respect, even causians born and raised in the Zambezi valley etc. This especially holds in the hotter seasons (which is most the annual cycle); water is precious, one feeds the tsetse flies etc and the rugged topography and rough substrates exact their forfeit literally in sweat and blood, and more. The bush is often thick even when using elephant paths. These realities are coupled with the need for a certain "nimbleness of foot" where one walks up to and around large carnivores and pachyderms! In the past I carried a pack + a heavy rifle for self protection of colleagues. And in museum work often packed a folding 410 shotgun with dustshot for scientific collecting... Keep gear to the minimum :-) Some of us learnt out survival lessons decades back.

It's no difference in equatorial forests, either in piroque or on foot. And the Congo is no picnic...

On the other hand, here in the Cape Folds Mts it is easy to carry Zeiss and 1 longer lens but again I prefer flexibility. Plus packing other kit for cover overnight or sudden storms (especially Drakensberg and Chimanimanis) and sustenance adds up.

3) Only Nikon or Zeiss lenses

calls the likes of us call fundamentalist, all i've come to need  but maybe a Voigt – there’s the 28 and also 58 1.4….

 

4) Classic pancake?
The actual Nikon pro 28mm is the Nikkor AF-S 28mm f/1.8G: it seems to be a plastic toy: aren't you agree? It seems to be the 18-55mm DX!!!! I want a solid lens in my hands when I shoot, like Zeiss or old metal Nikkor AF-D lenses, or actual Nikon pro zoom lenses

the Nikkor Twenties, and quite a few others – I also swear by the 45 2.8 AIP Nikkor , and there’s the Voigtlander 28. I'm planning to try it later this year
 try not to do plastic but it's becoming hard to dodge these days. And it's integral to DSLRs ? in fact, i've seen polycarbonate survive hard knocks but they wear out over the years. Is this not why the new G  and E Nikkors carry the encircled "10" for a decade life span max?!

5) Nikon AF-D 28mm f/2.8 isn't a good performer for the quality I want

i would get Zeiss or the Voigt

enjoy your Distagons; they'll sure do full justice in the karst, especially those stunning blue waters against dark greens, and white waterfalls and rock etc

kind regards

Woody

[Jedi]

Good morning, master. You said: "The newer f/1.8 version would be better as it definitively is NOT a "plastic toy".

I am honored to receive your answer. When you touch and you try to shoot with the Nikon 28mm f/1.8G, it seems to shoot with the Nikkor AF-S 18-55mm DX (or 18-70mm, but there isn't difference for the touch), in my opinion. I think that it's a ridiculos thing that Nikon for a pro prime lens doesn't use metal and it's true first of all for more expensive prime pro lenses, such as AF-S 24mm f/1.4G and 35mm f/1.4G, which are also very expensive!! A photographer who chooses Nikon, professional or amateur (like me) user, don't deserve a PLASTIC bayone, PLASTIC barrel exterior, PLASTIC focus ring. Also if the sharpness is almost excellent, the plastic doesn't ensure constancy and precision for a long time, with a hard use, like a professionist's work use. It's true that today the great brands don't use metal materials as it once was, for commercial reason, I think, but 28/1.8G, 35/1.4G, 24/1.4G are full of plastic, it's absolutely true!!!!! The handfeel when you shoot with one of these lenses and a lens of the '60's years is very different! I'm 40 years old and I shoot from 24 years, with film and mechanic bodies at the beginning (for my great luck!!!), Zenit (no money!!!), Pentax, Minolta SR-T series and Nikon from 2000. I've used old Nikon tanks, indestructible, such as 105mm f/2DC, 135mm f/2DC, 85/1.4D, 80-200mm f/2.8 AF e AF-S (all types), 28-70/2.8, to not speak about AI-S Nikon lenses!!!! Minolta SR-T series lenses, the old Minolta Rokkor MC I serie (for example Rokkor MC 35mm f/1.8, 58mm f/1.4, 135mm f/2.8, 85mm f/1.7, 28mm f/3.5) was pro lenses all-metal. Nikon offends me with a plastic pro prime lens if it wants 1800$ for the 35/1.4G and 2200$ for the 24/1.4G: the plastic doesn't ensure constancy and precision for a long time and there isn't the old wonderful handfeel. Zeiss has continued to produce all-metal lenses: for this reason for the fixes focal from 18mm to 35mm I have choosen Zeiss lenses (and I sold Nikon AF-S 20/1.8, 24/1.4G, 35/1.4G, the 28mm f/1.8G even bought, just tried it in store), for portraits I have choosen Nikon AF-S 105mm f/1.4E G (I need AF) and for street Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII, and for long trekking pnòy zooms (14-24mm, 24-70mm f/2.8E VRII, 70-200mm f/2.8E VRII FL).
However, the main subject of this topic was to know if in low light conditions, of landscapes and of environmental portrait, Nikon 28mm f/1.4 (another solid glass of a time!!) can give something extra, something wonderful and Zeiss no, it was the reason of its f/1.4 at film era, when ISO was only low (today you could shoot at 3200 ISO without problems and the following shoot at 64 ISO).
Excuse for my English.

[Jedi]

As I said the Zeiss I have are in a class of their own. I bought Used in near mint at substantial lower cost but they are by no means cheap. And i'm sure from the reliable feedback from the likes of Ming Thein and similar experienced and conscientious bloggers on the www (on which I based my decision) that the 28 Zeiss is no different.

I've only tried the 28 f2.8 AI, which was fine but with latest generation of DSLRs esp Nikon D810 i selected Zeiss. And don't regret it. I don't need AF mF is great for landscapes and closeups. Im most fond of the Tiny Twenties  - tough Nikkor classics and often use them when carrying telephotos etc + carbon fibre monopod or tripod. And as reiterated on NG, the 20 f4 doesn't flare into the sun

well, all i can say and I'm not being facetious here - each to their own  Check out the parallel NG thread active over past couple of days on the 300 2.8 and larger. Spells  out outweighing factors

 Telephotos tip the balance of the kit one can lug especially in hills and higher. And my choices in central Africa are tempered by the heat etc. It will literally kill many people if they don't treat tropical landscapes with respect, even causians born and raised in the Zambezi valley etc. This especially holds in the hotter seasons (which is most the annual cycle); water is precious, one feeds the tsetse flies etc and the rugged topography and rough substrates exact their forfeit literally in sweat and blood, and more. The bush is often thick even when using elephant paths. These realities are coupled with the need for a certain "nimbleness of foot" where one walks up to and around large carnivores and pachyderms! In the past I carried a pack + a heavy rifle for self protection of colleagues. And in museum work often packed a folding 410 shotgun with dustshot for scientific collecting... Keep gear to the minimum :-) Some of us learnt out survival lessons decades back.

It's no difference in equatorial forests, either in piroque or on foot. And the Congo is no picnic...

On the other hand, here in the Cape Folds Mts it is easy to carry Zeiss and 1 longer lens but again I prefer flexibility. Plus packing other kit for cover overnight or sudden storms (especially Drakensberg and Chimanimanis) and sustenance adds up.
calls the likes of us call fundamentalist, all i've come to need  but maybe a Voigt – there’s the 28 and also 58 1.4….

 
the Nikkor Twenties, and quite a few others – I also swear by the 45 2.8 AIP Nikkor , and there’s the Voigtlander 28. I'm planning to try it later this year
 try not to do plastic but it's becoming hard to dodge these days. And it's integral to DSLRs ? in fact, i've seen polycarbonate survive hard knocks but they wear out over the years. Is this not why the new G  and E Nikkors carry the encircled "10" for a decade life span max?!

i would get Zeiss or the Voigt

enjoy your Distagons; they'll sure do full justice in the karst, especially those stunning blue waters against dark greens, and white waterfalls and rock etc

kind regards

Woody

I respect you! 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I have several of the newer f/1.8 AFS  wide angles (20/1.8, 24/1.8 ), plus the latest AFS 24/1.4 and 35/1.4 Nikkors.

To diminish their quality and usability by scorning for being "plastic" is miles off the target and very little helpful characteristic. They are all excellent optics, handle quite well, and have proven their robustness under field conditions.

Do remember that the "plastic" involved here is strong polycarbonate and you would be surprised how much of knocks and bumps such designs can take in its stride. The optical designs are all first class and most are noticeable better optics than their MF predecessors.

Some of the lenses you refer to, such as the 105/2 DC Nikkor, has a field record of being quite vulnerable due to the bad construction of the A/M switch. Thus, I had my first 105 DC literally splitting into two on a mountain in the Czech Republic some years ago. The exterior can give misleading impressions. Do note that the 28/1.4 has the same flawed detail.

If you really need to avoid plastic in any form, then the sole option if the first generation of the Nikon F with matching lenses. No digital. Oh wait, even on the Nikon F there are plastic parts

[Jedi]

I have several of the newer f/1.8 AFS  wide angles (20/1.8, 24/1., plus the latest AFS 24/1.4 and 35/1.4 Nikkors.

To diminish their quality and usability by scorning for being "plastic" is miles off the target and very little helpful characteristic. They are all excellent optics, handle quite well, and have proven their robustness under field conditions.

Do remember that the "plastic" involved here is strong polycarbonatestrong polycarbonate and you would be surprised how much of knocks and bumps such designs can take in its stride. The optical designs are all first class and most are noticeable better optics than their MF predecessors.

If you really need to avoid plastic in any form, then the sole option if the first generation of the Nikon F with matching lenses. No digital. Oh wait, even on the Nikon F there are plastic parts

1) Have you used them for 20-25 years, at least, yet?
2) Strong polycarbonate, yes, but plastic, anyway! Don't you ever think that a professional or amateur user, deserve something better? (I repeat)
3) They are excellnt optics, ok, but the palstic don't ensure cunstance like the metal for a long time, I repeat.
4) Great optical design, certainly!!
5) My old 24-70mm f/2.8 (my first 24-70mm, not VRII) crashed in mountain and it separated into two definite parts for a little fall; in the past also my old AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 "double ring" (second version of the 80-200mm f/2.8, not the pump, not the AF-S) crashed, on a rock on the terrain and remained unhurt: you know that it's obvious....., plastic vs metal!!! 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D, 85/1.4D, 105/2D DC, 135 f/2D DC, 28/1.4D, 300mm AF f/4 were thank and not lenses for digital cameras, but they were another thing. Nikon has choosen this street and I have choosen Zeiss.

But, master, what do you think about Nikon 28/1.4D vs Zeiss Distagon T* 28/2 in low lights conditions for color rendering?

Thank you, master!

[longzoom]

Mr. Rorslett, do you remember what kind of message you have posted in my address for big/long quota like this directly above your post? Or messages of this sort allowed for SOME members only? Would you clarify, please? Thank you!

[Jedi]

Mr. Rorslett, do you remember what kind of message you have posted in my address for big/long quota like this directly above your post? Or messages of this sort allowed for SOME members only? Would you clarify, please? Thank you!

Excuse me, Have I done something wrong in the forum?....., in the messages?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Not sure what you refer to here? We aim to treat member on a like footing.

Extensive quotes are very rarely, if at all,  required. However, the admins try to avoid editing them by shortening when the member themselves ought to do this.

The very long quote could have been shortened to something like this

As I said the Zeiss I have are in a class of their own. ....

enjoy your Distagons; they'll sure do full justice in the karst, especially those stunning blue waters against dark greens, and white waterfalls and rock etc

kind regards

Woody

Even shorter versions would be possible.

[longzoom]

Hello!

Can you report, please, your impressions, your opinions, for your personal experience, about the comparison between the Nikkor AF-D 28mm f/1.4 and Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f/2?
Do you prefer Nikon or Zeiss for mountain landascapes and (few) indoor environmental portraits, please?

Nikon 28mm is also famous four its spectacular results in low lights, but Zeiss is Zeiss.....
I would shoot with Nikon D810.

Thank you!!!!

This Nikkor is a relict from film era. Needs to be closed to 5.6 to be accessibly sharp to its corners. Contrast is on the low side, so, the color, accordingly. Actually, is not very bad even today, but clearly shows its age. Zeiss is simply better of almost every respect, but, vignettes much wide open. Yet, sometimes, into the sun, harder to focus. Please note, it is my experience only! LZ

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I strongly prefer the plastic and rubber on the outer surface of lenses and cameras as they do not feel cold to touch in very cold (-15C to -35C) temperatures as metal does. Also I have experienced a Zeiss lens' manual focus to jam and break in the cold in conditions where Nikkors perform flawlessly. I think too tight tolerances and lack of sufficient outdoor testing are responsible.

The 24-70 has since been improved mechanically (E version). This type of lenses (wide to tele) have extending structure for various reasons (one is optimal use of the hood at different focal lengths). Most f/2.8 telezooms have internal zoom which makes them more robust but it doesn't make them go from tele to wide angle does it. It is extremely difficult to make a lens change from wide angle to tele and maintain high image quality.

I do think manual focus of AF-S 24/1.4 and 20/1.8 should be improved to avoid the play when changing direction of turning the ring. However the optical results from these lenses are excellent and I do think the 24/1.4 is very robust.