NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Bjørn Rørslett on January 25, 2016, 21:56:53
-
Once in a while, it can be beneficial and soothing to one's mind to see what could be achieved with the old Nikkors back in the stone age days before plastics, AF, and cheap designs entered the scene.
I invite anyone using or having used any of the 28/2 Nikkors (pre-AI, AI, AIS) to show some examples of what the lens could deliver. Your thought around that lens are of course most welcome as well.
I like this kind of lens because it is neat, handles well, doesn't create much of a lens flare issue on its own, and can focus quite close. You thus can use the wide angle character of forcing yourself (and the viewer) into the scene so as to create more intimacy, whilst at the same time being able to capture the ambience of the main subject.
Minimal Impact
-
After you let me try your chipped Ai28/2.0, I decided to buy one for me. I've used my Ais version (the last one with the super integrated coatings) only with the lowly D40, but the flare/ghost control was excellent.
-
Don't look down on the D40 or even more so, on the D40x. They are great cameras. Surprisingly robust as well - my D40X has survived ordeals known to knock other makes unconscious :D
-
Actually, my memories with D40 are rather pleasing. :) It was an excellent "entry model" in the true sense of the word thanks to its UV-VIS-IR capability without modification.
I still adore the look of CCD images, and even now I sometimes want to purchase D60 or D3000. My eyes was not as deteriorated as now, so the manual focusing on its tiny screen with this short lens was of no problem. :'(
-
I have the pre-AI version and like the lens a lot. It has a complete different character as the 1.8G, smoother bokey, and the advantages as Bjørn describes in the opening post.
Here wide open at a Military Veterans-day. Love it how the background is built up.
D700
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1543/24622850225_a79024133e_o.jpg)
Old timers Haarlem
-
I have a Nikon 28mm f/2 Ai lens. Wonderful lens.
-
Nick..fantastic shot. The lighting, the color, the texture all very nice.
-
I have the AIS version. It is quite soft at f/2, much better at f/2.8. I really like the perspective it give for the collections of Old Autos nearby.
The first image is of the roller mills at the old Star flower mill. Built in the 1880's and functional until about 40 years ago, it was water powered until the end.
Lowell
-
Just found another one I like. This old gasoline delivery truck, 1927 vintage Ford. It is located on the grounds of a self-storage facility. The owner gets revenue from the storage units (hundreds of them) and then seems to love to invest in vintage gasoline station collectibles.
Lowell
-
Like the slower 28/2.8 AIS, the 28/2 has its CRC done by the front group of the optics. This makes it susceptible to bumps and knocks I guess and might explain the sometimes conflicting statements about the optical performance in particular at the widest apertures. I once purchased a second-hand copy that exhibited stellar sharpness on half the frame and was bad mush on the other side. The seller claimed it was "within specifications" and I had to bring some pressure to bear before I got my money back. The next sample was flawless.
-
Like the slower 28/2.8 AIS, the 28/2 has its CRC done by the front group of the optics. This makes it susceptible to bumps and knocks I guess and might explain the sometimes conflicting statements about the optical performance in particular at the widest apertures. I once purchased a second-hand copy that exhibited stellar sharpness on half the frame and was bad mush on the other side. The seller claimed it was "within specifications" and I had to bring some pressure to bear before I got my money back. The next sample was flawless.
Bjorn,
How difficult is the re-alignment procedure? I would like my copy to perform will at f/2 for several reasons.
Regards,
Lowell
-
Good question.
My sample looks okay, I guess.
-
Lowell: a qualified repair shop probably can have a go at it, provided they get hold of the repair manual. Any Nikon repair facility should have these manuals.
However, with such volume sellers it might be cheaper to locate another copy. Repairs can rapidly become too expensive for items of modest inherent cost.
-
A night scene with the 28/2 and the comet Hale-Bopp (1997). Obviously no EXIF back then as I used the Nikon F2 to capture the comet, but my field notes state the shot was at "wide aperture". This copy is an AI.
Film grain is obvious, but so is the general impression of sharpness that prevails.
-
Lowell: a qualified repair shop probably can have a go at it, provided they get hold of the repair manual. Any Nikon repair facility should have these manuals.
However, with such volume sellers it might be cheaper to locate another copy. Repairs can rapidly become too expensive for items of modest inherent cost.
Thanks Bjorn - Good suggestion. I want the close focusing distance of the f/2 lens, hence the Gerbera Daises. Being better educated, I will know what to test for.
Lowell
-
Perhaps you ought to look into the 28/2.8 AIS - it does focus noticeably closer and is better optimised for the near range.
-
Like the slower 28/2.8 AIS, the 28/2 has its CRC done by the front group of the optics. This makes it susceptible to bumps and knocks I guess and might explain the sometimes conflicting statements about the optical performance in particular at the widest apertures...
My 28mm f/2.8 AIS has suffered rolling down a 4m dropoff hitting one rocky outcrop after another, finally digging deep into the sand on a beach, and being dropped on concrete floor from 1.5 m. It still does not show signs of decentering. I think in both cases it took the impact from the side while rotating, and the front is "protected" by a 52mm to 62mm step-up ring in front of an NC filter (which did not break on any of the occasions, but had to be replaced after the "sand blasting"). It does have a deep mark of honor in the chrome ring though.
-
OK, so you have been lucky. Evidence from poorly centered copies indicate not everyone share this experience.
-
The 28/2 wide open. Better not corner your subject. Otherwise an interesting rendering, with sufficient sharpness not too far from the center.
The present shot is a bit pushing the lens into the extreme. Df, 28/2 AI.
BTW I am fond of that lens, the rendering of which is very different from the 28/1.8 G. The latter is no doubt sharper wide open ; stopped down I prefer the oldie.
-
Coma : bad (pls view large)
-
Still wide open. When sharpness is secondary, the lens gets more interesting.
-
OK, so you have been lucky. Evidence from poorly centered copies indicate not everyone share this experience.
Yes, I felt very lucky after my 28mm f/2.8 AIS took the flight, but not so much when I watched it roll over the edge of the dropoff in "slow motion". Although admittedly my next thought was "that is it"; it could not have survived, so now I had an excuse to try out the 28mm f/2 version of the lens. :D Perhaps what saved it was the final landing place in the sand, and that it apparently did not hit in the front part very hard as the step-up ring did not have any deep marks or dings to it.
-
I love this little lens, and my copy is superb example of this true Nikon classic. Sharp in the centre from f2, it is extremely sharp all over by f4 and this is maintained until about f9 or f10 where slight diffraction effects creep in. (A little careful extra sharpening deals with that.) Vignetting is apparent at the wider apertures but is minimal at f4 and gone at f5.6.
The comma mentioned by Airy is certainly present but of course is only a problem for night shots, and again is gone by f4.
In spite of that last point, what I mostly use the 28/2 for is photography of the night sky, and it will be no surprise to learn that I generally shoot at f4 - sharp all over, vignetting and comma gone, and usefully, a hard infinity stop (unlike modern lenses) so you always know you are correctly focussed.
The attachment shows the effects of light pollution but in this case I don't think it matters.
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3804/11382275176_7e1084fe8d_o.jpg)
with a bit of processing
Zandvoort
-
"with a bit of processing" - I'd say, more like a lot :D
The banding in the sky is annoying and should be taken care of. Otherwise the effect is OK.
-
"with a bit of processing" - I'd say, more like a lot :D
The banding in the sky is annoying and should be taken care of. Otherwise the effect is OK.
Thanks, indeed correction needed
-
Azalea time last April, Nezu Shrine, Tokyo.
-
Indeed coma is completely gone at F/4
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1614/24303316649_0951572c5f_o.jpg)
flare is evident shooting into the sun, sideways anyhow
-
Back to the main subject. This is an uninteresting picture, but for test purposes. 28/2 wide open on D800. The photo shows that
- resistance to backlight is very good (many lenses would fail that test) in the sense that the highlights would not contaminate the shadows in a significant way. This only applies to the bigger surfaces;
- Distortion is conspicuous but regular barrel, and easily corrected "by hand" (typically +6-+8 in Lightroom)
- Vignetting is moderate (compared e.g. with Zeiss lenses)
- central sharpness is very good, and the "center" is not that small !
- however, the "bleeding" caused by highlights is massive at the borders of dark parts ; the "cross" at the top of the organ case is completely blurred, although the same wood carvings below are OK
- in the upper left corner, you will see that there is some preserved detail smeared by tons of mush
- CA is visible above the top part of the organ case (orange fringes at the edges of the window frames), but moderate - remember it's a 36 Mp sensor we got here
Bottom line : far from ridiculous ! but for working against the light, better stop down a bit. The issues are the coma & astigmatism, plus the "bleeding" issues. Concerning the latter, I do not precisely know the driving factors (reflections between surfaces of adjacent lenses? hence the efficiency of modern coatings?)
-
Still wide open, but using the Df. The degraded quality of corners is apparent. However, CA is low and correction is not even useful. And the Eiffel tower struts in the background still look decent.
-
Bleeding is strongly exacerbated by overexposure ....
-
The shot is rather underexposed, since the subject is the organ, not the stained glass window. These are my normal shooting conditions. You'll certainly understand why I struggle finding suitable lenses (and many excellent ones catastrophically fail here). The 28/2 is, as I wrote, relatively good in fact.
Now about the bokeh : two shots, close and less close, D800. As usual, sharpness is high in the focussed zones. Transitions are progressive, providing a good perception of depth. The bokeh is not bad, but can deliver sharp edges (see for instance the twigs and the foliage in the background).
-
I do not want to appear aas the guy always providing counter-examples illustrated by bad shots, so -
The sweet spot for night shots is definitely f/4, as stated before by others. Coma is gone (that's the least one would expect), contrast is very good, so is overall sharpness well into the corners.
-
Stopped down performance looks nice, but unless the background is quite simple, as in Nick's beach shot, the bokeh looks quite barfy to me. Though I wouldn't be leaning on a 28mm for bokeh shots I suppose.
-
One can make use of the fine bokeh of this lens. Two examples wide open,
City Mushrooms with Df and Autumn tree with D700
-
At f/11, the lens still delivers very high detail, retaining a good contrast. Good colors, too. Here on D800
-
Stopped down performance looks nice, but unless the background is quite simple, as in Nick's beach shot, the bokeh looks quite barfy to me. Though I wouldn't be leaning on a 28mm for bokeh shots I suppose.
Agreed. The bokeh quality is very much subject-dependent, as exemplified in many shots here. But in general it is rather nervous. Taking bokeh shots with this lens feels rather natural, given its good close focus performance.
-
One can make use of the fine bokeh of this lens. Two examples wide open,
City Mushrooms with Df and Autumn tree with D700
In the second shot, the bokeh is indeed somewhat nervous (and interesting). The 28/2 is no cream machine.
-
Yes, but keep in mind that in the second shot the bokeh is exaggerated in PP. (with purpose) Originally it's softer.
-
... f/8. Certainly "overprocessed", but the RAW file lends itself well to such processing.
-
Looking for something overcooked but cannot observe ...
-
Precisely. For reference, this is the original, nearly unprocessed shot.
-
City Mushrooms with Df
Lovely shot John.
It would never occur to me to use a 28mm for mushrooms, but obviously in the right hands (and with the right eyes) it's not a problem
-
Airy, I am quite sensitive to over cooked photos and I do not see that with your image.
The bokeh indeed seems very temperamental, which isn't all that strange. The 50mm f/1.2 can easily produce some of the most nauseating results when the wrong choices are made as well, despite how much I generally love it's bokeh. I would still be in line to purchase a 28mm f/2 if I hadn't recently tried a 28mm and realized I want wider.
-
Lovely shot John.
It would never occur to me to use a 28mm for mushrooms, but obviously in the right hands (and with the right eyes) it's not a problem
Thanks Colin. 28mm enables good opportunities to give an impression of the location and still have realistic details of the mushrooms. BTW the tree was chopped two days later, so I was just in time here ;)
-
I forgot to mention, that mushroom shot was indeed nice John. Certainly a showcase of when the 28mm f/2 does bokeh right!
-
Thanks Tristin. It's the choice of the photographer how to use the background. But that applies for any lens of course. If I have the time for a shot I usually take four shots at different apertures to compare the background (or bokeh) (and the main subject of course).
-
Airy, I am quite sensitive to over cooked photos and I do not see that with your image.
The bokeh indeed seems very temperamental, which isn't all that strange. The 50mm f/1.2 can easily produce some of the most nauseating results when the wrong choices are made as well, despite how much I generally love it's bokeh. I would still be in line to purchase a 28mm f/2 if I hadn't recently tried a 28mm and realized I want wider.
Compared to my usual practice, it is somewhat overcooked.
You are right about the 50/1.2. In both cases (28/2 and 50/1.2) one has to accept the limits. But both belong to my favourites when kept within their limits, and there is lots of room inside those limits. I alredy have to copies of the 50/1.2 (one AI, one AIS), only one of the 28/2 (AI) and they are all definitely going to stay.
-
The 28 is great if used in its natural performance range. If prefer to use it wide open for these near in focus shots with background blur. It has some haze @f2 but it doesn't matter if one goes for f2.8-4 for landscapes etc. Quality kicks in @f2.8 already. I thought I would sell it when I got my 24-70 but I will keep it. Its just one of these AIS jewels that will stay (as well as the AIS 50 1.2).
-
Same here; my standard 3-lens kit with the Df is 28/2, 50/1.2 and (guess whom...) 105/2.5... parting is out of the question.
-
Sören that is nice! Please post larger ;)
-
Depth of field is limited but its sharp where it should be - if you look at the small foot of the MayBeetle.
Larger Files (D3) here:
-
Thanks, Really nice! :D
-
Beautiful Sören !!
-
Pluton,
Thanks for the kind words about my photo. The 28 2.0 Ai tends to have a cooler tone to the photos which I like very much.
Cheers,
Nick
-
Sören,
Love the photo. Really nice.
Cheers,
Nick
-
Actually I know nothing about technical stuff, I just have read once how Bjorn praised this lens so I bought it. All I know is I like very much the pictures I've taken with it, that much that this is one of the few lens I've never sold nor will ever sell.
(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j265/bonceng/Equipment/Lenses/Nikon/28_2%20AIS/_DSC1844_NG_1200_zpsgu2vielp.jpg)
(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j265/bonceng/Equipment/Lenses/Nikon/28_2%20AIS/_DSC0784_zpsiuh9kxs3.jpg)
-
Another example of the 28mm f/2 wide open compared with f/16 (not exactly the same frame as it is all hand held)
-
AI, 1/200, f/11. I wish it would render the scent of the hamamelis in the same way.
-
I use a 28mm f/2 AI as a normal lens on the D7000 and like it very much. Usually avoiding the largest aperture because of the harsh bokeh, from f/2.8 it becomes more pleasant.
Here at f/4, with a 100% crop:
-
Any reason to prefer the f/2 over the 28 mm f/2.8 AIS for such scenery?
-
Yes, that's like an amplifier that goes to 11 vs. 10 😆
-
this lens holds it's value pretty well. :o :o :o very useful for videographers
-
Phew, finally managed to attach a picture :P
Anyway, this is a really old one
Shot for the press release of a beginning designer, location was the, at that moment still under construction, Ministry of Foreign Affairs in The Hague, somewhere in or around 1983
(The people of The Hague more popularly nicknamed the building 'the Monkey Rock', due to its high structure, with layer upon layer of balconies, just like you tend to see in the monkey pens at the zoo ;) )
We had to maneuver our way to one of the balconies, I think around 6 floors up, via building site elevators and improvised stairs, between construction workers, building materials, and obviously a lot of dirt and dust (which considering the dark toned clothing really made it a challenge.
The background may have been better if a bit more out of focus, but considering the lens used that was pretty much impossible
-
Very nice classic looking shot:)
-
Glad you are able to post now, Paul. Really an eighties look, with that building and the design.
-
Glad you are able to post now, Paul. Really an eighties look, with that building and the design.
she reminds me of the super exotic Sadé :o :o :o
-
Maybe I'm lucky with my copy, but I don't see much flare with it. Sure, right into the sun gives a little, but certainly manageable.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2840/33387437404_d86fde44ec_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SSkkWu)DFJ_4924 (https://flic.kr/p/SSkkWu) @f/8
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2936/34098454891_ac055987d8_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/TXauEF)DFJ_4933 (https://flic.kr/p/TXauEF) @f/11
-
D-750, pre-AI 28/2 with K-1, f/5.6
-
After a nearly green winter (only frequently snow cover on ground), the landscape was covered with 10-15 cm snow yesterday in Southeast Norway, causing lots of complete traffic chaos. This morning there were still white fields, and again snowflakes in air. (D750, AiS Nikkor 28/2.0 @ 1/1000, f/4, ISO 200).
-
Mine is AIS.
Pont des Arts et Académie française
2011 D700
-
beautiful
-
Wonderful lens, very good handling (weight-size-ergonomy) with good contrast, great resolution, and last but not least nice starshaped highlights.
Here a night shot with D300 and 2/28 Ais at f:8 iso 200 (jpeg fine)
-
Maybe I'm lucky with my copy, but I don't see much flare with it. Sure, right into the sun gives a little, but certainly manageable.
Which Model?
I see a sun star but precious little to call flare.
Dave Hartman
-
AI. Yes, relatively free of flare.
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5710/29793291923_bfa34413fc_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/MoJpGX)Stream Near Ouray Colorado (https://flic.kr/p/MoJpGX)
-
owned a mint copy (AI) for years. Beautifully built and performed fabulously. Did not use it much due to weight and bulk so ultimately sold it. However, that is not to take away from its inherently excellent qualities. Cannot post samples as they were lost in a hard drive crash some years ago but still remember them very distinctly.
-
owned a mint copy (AI) for years. Beautifully built and performed fabulously. Did not use it much due to weight and bulk so ultimately sold it.
Are you sure you about this? The 28/2 is smaller and lighter than the 35/1.4 or the 85/1.8 for instance. Just 345 grams and 58cm according to Roland's site.
I take it a lot with me because of it's small size (compared to the 1.8G), and you don't need a hood as the lens loves the sun.
Posted earlier in April 2017 topic
(http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5681.0;attach=24755;image)
-
Are you sure you about this? The 28/2 is smaller and lighter than the 35/1.4 or the 85/1.8 for instance. Just 345 grams and 58cm according to Roland's site.
Yes, John, very very sure. To Mongo 350gms is still quite weighty for a 28mm compared to other smaller aperture 28mm of its time. It felt like a small brick in your hand by comparison but a lovely lens to use if you were prepared to carry it around with all the other gear.
-
I have an Ai version, and it is my most used lens. It is compact, easy to use, and does a great job. I take it with me to document jobs and job sites, and I also use it when just playing with my camera. It works as well on my D700 as it does on my FE2.
These aren't artistic photos, but you can see what the little 28mm f/2.0 can do.
The first picture is an example of documenting a job site.
The second is a picture of a metal sculpture from a local artist, which was out in a field near his shop. The 28/2 allowed me to get a nice perspective on a life-sized sculpture. The third is a sculpture from the same artist, but this time, the photo is focused in closely on its snout and teeth.
If I was stuck with only two prime lenses, I'd keep this one and a 100mm macro. In fact, most of the time, that's exactly what I carry.
-
Mysh, I love the waterfall, especially since I live at the edge of the southwestern desert in the US. Waterfalls here are rare and usually seasonal.
-
From today's crop. Df, f/8.0
-
Nice B&W Airy ;)
-
Yes. Nice overview.
Interview by broadcastcompany Omroep Tilburg at the opening of 'Ontdekstation'.
At f/4
-
With the Nikkor 28mm 2.0 AIS at 5.6
(http://www.coldsiberia.net/nikon/_DSC1521_aftershot_pro_1200_from_RAW.jpg)
Also with the Nikkor 28mm 2.0 AIS at 5.6
(http://www.coldsiberia.net/nikon/_DSC1504_aftershot_pro_1200.jpg)
-
From the same standing point, front and back. Love both renditions. This a sunset in Conil, Spain.
Later on, after dinner and walking through town, there was a blackout. Full of turist, people dining and shopping, families, etc walking around and making do with their phones and the occasional car lights. Will share those later
note: nikon d700 with k3 focusing screen, first shot around f8 and second one fully open.
-
Well, bad news. On the way back from a job site, someone stole my pickup truck, which also had my camera bag including D700, 28/2 Ai, 50/1.4G, and 180/2.8 Ais ED. The truck was recovered after a week but all my tools, equipment and camera were gone.
I've since replaced the D700 and the 180/2.8. I replaced the 50/1.4G with a 35/2D. While the first lens I bought was a replacement 28/2 Ai, the replacement isn't a good copy. Gorgeous on the outside, it has unreported haze on the inside. I took it to a local lens repair, and he didn't fix it. Oh, sure. He lubed the helicoid, but the interior lens surfaces are still hazy, the the pictorial results with this copy are disappointing, to say the least.
So now I'm stuck with a crappy copy of what should be a wonderful lens.
-
Bad news and bad luck. And then there is the dealing with the repair places. I've lived in the L.A. area for decades, and cannot unreservedly recommend any independent camera/lens repair that I've dealt with. Some do a good job several times, then blow it bad---calling into question whether or not I'll ever use their services again.
Bets of luck sorting out what to do with the undesired 28mm.
-
Paco, that's a sunset worth shooting!...even though I rectified it to see it "better".
-
Sorry to hear about your copy. I hope in can be fixed.
Keith, thanks. Sunsets in that area are gorgeous. There are several spots withing 15-30 mins drive from each other one more beautiful than the previous. Worth considering for a vacation -not August...- Did you flip it to see it better? ::) I had to rotate it because it strike me as a planet image from NASA. If something else, I´ll love to see it!
-
Did you flip it to see it better? ::) I had to rotate it because it strike me as a planet image from NASA. If something else, I´ll love to see it!
I just rotated it 90º counter-clockwise, but I like it as you presented it also.
-
While the group finished picnic, playing with a dandelion, to bring back the thread.
-
Well, bad news. On the way back from a job site, someone stole my pickup truck, which also had my camera bag including D700, 28/2 Ai, 50/1.4G, and 180/2.8 Ais ED. The truck was recovered after a week but all my tools, equipment and camera were gone.
I've since replaced the D700 and the 180/2.8. I replaced the 50/1.4G with a 35/2D. While the first lens I bought was a replacement 28/2 Ai, the replacement isn't a good copy. Gorgeous on the outside, it has unreported haze on the inside. I took it to a local lens repair, and he didn't fix it. Oh, sure. He lubed the helicoid, but the interior lens surfaces are still hazy, the the pictorial results with this copy are disappointing, to say the least.
So now I'm stuck with a crappy copy of what should be a wonderful lens.
I have found that the Nikkor 28mm 2.0 AIS is seriously plagued with sample variation. I have one that is brilliant, and I have tried two others that performed dismally until stopped down to 4.0 or 5.6. None of these had any signs that they had been subjected to abuse or impacts. Other manual Nikkors have not showed this problem, they have all been uniformly good performers.
I do not know why this lens is problematic. It is said that it is vulnerable to impact, but I suspect that it is the bad old sample variation which shows. By the way, sample variation is much more widespread than many are aware of. This is particularly the case with zooms.
-
My main hypothesis is the variability is due to vulnerability of the CRC system, which on the 28 mm Nikkors is conducted with the front group.
Another lens with huge variation in performance is the 24/2 Nikkor and I positively know from my own sample that the CRC components (in this lens, the rear lens cell) quite easily comes out of alignment.
-
My main hypothesis is the variability is due to vulnerability of the CRC system, which on the 28 mm Nikkors is conducted with the front group.
Another lens with huge variation in performance is the 24/2 Nikkor and I positively know from my own sample that the CRC components (in this lens, the rear lens cell) quite easily comes out of alignment.
That is possible, and if so the question is whether the damage might be repairable. According to the repair shop - which is known to be very competent with Nikon equipment - the fault of my 28mm 2.0 AIS is irrepairable although they did not diagnose it at the time.
-
Autumn palette. Walkin' home after work this afternoon with D800 + AiS28/2.0 f/5,6 1/60 ISO200 Freehand.
-
Rosa rugosa and nice autumn colours. One is tempted to disregard this species being on the National Black Species list and campaigned against to eradicate in vulnerable ares.
-
One more with my Nikkor 28mm 2.0 AIS and the D750.
-
Rosa rugosa and nice autumn colours. One is tempted to disregard this species being on the National Black Species list and campaigned against to eradicate in vulnerable ares.
Too late for me, I had the soup cold. Hated it!
-
... I really like the perspective it give for the collections of Old Autos nearby ...
Lowell
Interesting. I use my 28mm f/2.8 AI-S for photographing autos a lot also, not for art though, but to document vehicle damage for my profession.
Have to agree that 28mm is the ideal focal length for this purpose. That and the fact the AI-S can get so close (for a ~1:4 reproduction ratio) allows me to document actual damage points precisely also.
Would like to try the pre-AI, f/2 version.
-
Here is a shot taken with the 28mm f/2.8 on the D810:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4391/36561127853_509fbb7bb2_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XGMkxk)
Rainbow Falls (https://flic.kr/p/XGMkxk) by John A. Koerner II (https://www.flickr.com/photos/naturescapes007/), on Flickr
I will be replacing it with the 28 f/2 soon ...
-
Here is a shot taken with the 28mm f/2.8 on the D810:
[...]
I will be replacing it with the 28 f/2 soon ...
Why would you replace the Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AIS with the Nikkor 28mm 2.0 AIS? Is the latter superior to the former in other ways than by virtue of its larger aperture?
-
I'd keep both. They are different in their various strengths and weaknesses, and neither costs much.
-
I'd keep both. They are different in their various strengths and weaknesses, and neither costs much.
That seems to me to be the wisest choice.
-
The 28/2 and f/2.8 models have each their strong and weaker sides, and serve different purposes. Both can easily co-exist in the photographer's tool box.
I have an on-off relationship with both of them, meaning I use them intensively a period of time, then move on to other wide lenses, then the cycle repeats itself. Although the f/2.8 is the better lens for close-up work, neither lens is a flat-field design like a Micro-Nikkor. That can confer an advantage sometimes, other times it is a drawback. The shooting conditions and aims decide which alternative it is.
I pulled a few randomly selected shots with either of the 28 (f/2, f/2.8 ) lenses from my archive. These optics are quite versatile in my view. Each of them is CPU-modified so interfaces gracefully with any of my many F-mount cameras.
-
Why would you replace the Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AIS with the Nikkor 28mm 2.0 AIS? Is the latter superior to the former in other ways than by virtue of its larger aperture?
There is no qualitative reason; I am just becoming somewhat of a snob, and don't like rubber focus rings.
If anything, the Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AIS is smaller, lighter, allows closer-focus distance, and is probably the better lens (albeit, not by much).
The difference is, in shooting Zeiss classics, I am becoming enamored with all-metal lenses and focus rings. They just feel better to use and rubber focus rings are becoming kind of a turn-off.
I wouldn't replace my f/2.8 28mm AI-S with an f/2 AI-S, but with the pre-AI f/2 version (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/6070nikkor/wides/28mm.htm), purely for aesthetic, all-metal snobbery.
-
I pulled a few randomly selected shots with either of the 28 (f/2, f/2.8 ) lenses from my archive. These optics are quite versatile in my view. Each of them is CPU-modified so interfaces gracefully with any of my many F-mount cameras.
The image quality of all four photographs is impressive, testament to the lenses in question.
But I want to comment on the "cityscape" image .....it grabbed my attention and won't let go. An image that gives me great pleasure to view. And a new glimpse into the thoughts of a talented (Great) photographer. One of those I wish I had taken photographs.
Cheers
-
We each have our personal preferences; I prefer handling the rubber focusing grips, though the all-metal lenses look cool and work fine. My only concern with the rubber rings would be longevity before disintegration. Luckily, the old Nikon rubber from the 1970's has proved to be long lasting.
On the first model 28/2 Nikkor-N, be prepared for a noticeable yellowish color tint compared to the subsequent models. My copy, when I had it, was very sharp.
-
We each have our personal preferences; I prefer handling the rubber focusing grips, though the all-metal lenses look cool and work fine. My only concern with the rubber rings would be longevity before disintegration. Luckily, the old Nikon rubber from the 1970's has proved to be long lasting.
On the first model 28/2 Nikkor-N, be prepared for a noticeable yellowish color tint compared to the subsequent models. My copy, when I had it, was very sharp.
Thanks for the tip.
I bought 5 different AI-S zooms ... and every single one of them "rendered yellow" as well. Got rid of them all for this.
I eventually found one zoom (the second 28-50 I bought) that renders true and like my other AI-Ses.
So, good point, and I will definitely watch for this.
-
BEZ: thanks. One of those scenes that suddenly manifests itself. Just shoot and hope for the best. The photographer becomes an automated device, possibly because the scene is already envisioned subconsciously. You act on reflexes.
As to the rubber focusing rings, they are pretty long lasting and should they wear out, easy to replace. A well designed (non-smooth) rubber focusing ring ensures a better grip than the all-metal ones if you work in cold weather using gloves.
-
As to the rubber focusing rings, they are pretty long lasting and should they wear out, easy to replace. A well designed (non-smooth) rubber focusing ring ensures a better grip than the all-metal ones if you work in cold weather using gloves.
If the rubber is really classic rubber (caoutchouc) and not neoprene or a similar long lasting substance, I would say that it is not well designed - at least not when it comes to material. Caoutchouc inevitably oxidizes and breaks down in light - as we all know.
-
There is no qualitative reason; I am just becoming somewhat of a snob, and don't like rubber focus rings.
If anything, the Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AIS is smaller, lighter, allows closer-focus distance, and is probably the better lens (albeit, not by much).
It seems to me that the Nikkor 28/2.0 AI/S is plagued with sample variation or perhaps is so susceptible to being destroyed by bumps and falls that it is difficult to find a good sample. I have seen three different ones, and one is brilliant whereas the other two were dismally mushy in the periphery and a long way towards the center. I have more confidence in the 28/2.8 AI/S.
The following two are made by me with the Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AIS on a D750. In both cases the aperture was 5.6.
-
Per Inge: you read too literally; all "rubber" on the focusing collars of the Nikkors has been synthetic (neoprene etc.) for many decades.
By the way, the CRC of the f/2.8 AIS is also of the front type, in common with the f/2.
-
It seems to me that the Nikkor 28/2.0 AI/S is plagued with sample variation or perhaps is so susceptible to being destroyed by bumps and falls that it is difficult to find a good sample. I have seen three different ones, and one is brilliant whereas the other two were dismally mushy in the periphery and a long way towards the center. I have more confidence in the 28/2.8 AI/S.
The following two are made by me with the Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AIS on a D750. In both cases the aperture was 5.6.
I hear you. I know my 28 AI-S is a good copy, it has proven itself both properly-oriented, and reversed, stunningly-sharp, absolutely-superb color.
Maybe I should just keep it ... and hope I get a nice 28 f/2 pre-AI for fun ... before I let the known quantity go.
-
Per Inge: you read too literally; all "rubber" on the focusing collars of the Nikkors has been synthetic (neoprene etc.) for many decades.
By the way, the CRC of the f/2.8 AIS is also of the front type, in common with the f/2.
I did not truly assume that caoutchouc was used, since it has a characteristic smell - the smell of eventual oxidation, breakdown and disintegration. I have seen far too many O-rings, armorings and caoutchouc rubber eyecups to accept that material in instruments that are meant to last more than a year.
But I assumed - rightly as it turned out - that the CRC of the 28/2.8 AIS was of the front version. The question still remains why two of three Nikkor 28/2.0 I have tried have shown severe quality problems whereas I have not seen anything of the sort in two examined copies of the 28/2.8. Also, granted that the theory that damage to the CRC group is correct the question is whether or not the damage is repairable.
-
Here's a comparison of two different Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais lenses:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/28mm_2.html (http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/28mm_2.html)
-
...
But I assumed - rightly as it turned out - that the CRC of the 28/2.8 AIS was of the front version. The question still remains why two of three Nikkor 28/2.0 I have tried have shown severe quality problems whereas I have not seen anything of the sort in two examined copies of the 28/2.8. Also, granted that the theory that damage to the CRC group is correct the question is whether or not the damage is repairable.
The first sample I had of the 28/2.8 AIS had to be returned due to massive decentering originating with the front CRC group. The next sample was is very good to excellent for close-ups, but the f/2 is better at distance.
-
As mentioned earlier in this thread, my 28mm f/2.8 AIS has taken several serious drops without any apparent harm, still performing very well. I recently had the opportunity to try out a 24mm f/2. The construction somehow felt flimsy compared to my 28mm f/2.8 AIS, and the edge performance was very poor at infinity.
-
As mentioned earlier in this thread, my 28mm f/2.8 AIS has taken several serious drops without any apparent harm, still performing very well. I recently had the opportunity to try out a 24mm f/2. The construction somehow felt flimsy compared to my 28mm f/2.8 AIS, and the edge performance was very poor at infinity.
I have never seen the Nikkor 24mm 2.0 AI/S, but I have seen several 24/2.8 AI-versions. They have all been very good. The same is the case with the Nikkor 28mm 2.8 AIS, but I have only examined two of these - in other words too few to be really statistically significant. I am however a bit worried by the fact that two of the three 28/2.0 AIS lenses I have seen have been practically useless due to sub par performance. The third was and is excellent, as is the 28mm 2.8 AIS.
It would be interesting to hear more experiences with the Nikkor 28/2.0 AI/AIS.
-
I’m really happy with mine. I think it is quite sharp and has good colors, tending towards the warm side. I like it for landscapes.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4330/36072252676_aaf20aceb5_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WXzHYY)
I have the AI-S so it focuses pretty well close up.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4493/37614869746_22236c7232_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/ZiU3i1)DFJ_6871 (https://flic.kr/p/ZiU3i1)
Wide open it is still pleasing (crazy bokeh emphasized here in post processing)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4489/36953507254_fe1d1c4a87_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Yisogq)DFJ_6866 (https://flic.kr/p/Yisogq)
-
As mentioned earlier in this thread, my 28mm f/2.8 AIS has taken several serious drops without any apparent harm, still performing very well. I recently had the opportunity to try out a 24mm f/2. The construction somehow felt flimsy compared to my 28mm f/2.8 AIS, and the edge performance was very poor at infinity.
The "flimsiness" might be a rear CRC group working itself lose, which is a common problem with the 24/2. This would also result in poor infinity performance off axis.
As to its overall construction and workmanship of build the 24/2 is on the same level as the 28/2. See the photo below of the pair of fast Nikkors.
A properly adjusted 24/2 is pretty sharp also at distance.
-
Very nice images, Jack. Number two is what I would call a 3-D stunner. 8)
-
The question still remains why two of three Nikkor 28/2.0 I have tried have shown severe quality problems whereas I have not seen anything of the sort in two examined copies of the 28/2.8.
Chance?
-
I'm quite pleased with my 28/2.0 AI and always a bit pleasantly surprised when looking at the first images of the shoot. It is the first and only I bought.
I literally found a 24/2.0 AI at the bottom of a box of old Nikon stuff bought for nothing at a garage sales but given its poor reputation I have not paid a lot of attention to it.
-
Chance?
Possibly. I hope so.
-
Nikkor 24/2, the "poor reputation lens" still managed this capture,
-
Maybe the most photographed oak in Norway, at the Campus of Norwegian University of Life Sciences (Ås municipality, 30 km south of Oslo). [AiS 28/2.0 w/D800, 1/320 f=5,6 ISO200, removed chromatic aberration].
-
Nikkor 24/2, the "poor reputation lens" still managed this capture,
This thread had already changed my mind on the interest of testing 24/2 and your picture motivates me further.
-
Most samples of the 24/2 I've seen needed some tightening of the rear CRC group. This is the weak point of the design, however once brought back to proper positioning of this CRC section, the lens performs well enough. The misalignment has lent it a poor reputation and thus lowered the asking price, so it's a win-win scenario in force here.
-
Most samples of the 24/2 I've seen needed some tightening of the rear CRC group. This is the weak point of the design, however once brought back to proper positioning of this CRC section, the lens performs well enough. The misalignment has lent it a poor reputation and thus lowered the asking price, so it's a win-win scenario in force here.
What are the advantages of the Nikkor 24/2.0 AI/S over the Nikkor 24/2.8 AI/S, apart from its being a faster lens? I have very positive experiences with the latter, but have not tried the former.
-
Maybe time for an admin to fork the discussion to a dedicated 24/2.0 thread and move there the relevant posts?
-
Hi Maybe somebody is able to help me.
I just got this lens: a Nikon Nikkor N Auto 28mm F2. On the focus ring there is a rather big round inlay/cover. Never seen this on any other Nikkors from that era.
Does anybody know what this is?
Thanks in advance.
-
Don't recall why it has this cover but I think all Pre Ai had it,,,
https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/6070nikkor/wides/28mm.htm
-
Hi Erik,
Only the 28mm has such cover.
Any other focus length from that time (auto H, O, Q, S,) hasn't: so I wonder what is it? ::)
-
Nice looking lens! You are right, I haven't seen this feature on any other Nikkor. I believe the cover can be pried off to reveal a screw for assembly/disassembly or for adjusting the lens. Hopefully someone with more knowledge (Eric, Richard?) can confirm this.
-
I had a copy of this lens pre-digital. I always assumed the round metal thing was a service cover of some sort. My copy had beautiful image sharpness at all stops, but also had a fairly pronounced yellow color tint. The yellow tint...and the round thing... were eliminated when Nikon redesigned the lens for the 'New Nikkor' styling change of the early 1970's.
-
Sorry for my ignorance, but for what stands the acronym « CRC » for, used throughout the last four pages ? Thanks.
-
Close Range Correction
The Close-Range Correction (CRC) system is one of Nikon's most important focusing innovations, for it provides superior picture quality at close focusing distances and increases the focusing range. With CRC, the lens elements are configured in a "floating element" design wherein each lens group moves independently to achieve focusing. This ensures superior lens performance even when shooting at close distances. The CRC system is used in fisheye, wideangle, Micro, and selected medium telephoto NIKKOR lenses.
-
Thank you Erik 😉
-
Erik, does CRC effectively change the focal length, like the micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 D, where the working distance diminishes rapidly the closer you get, I know that's naturaly the case but it disappears more much quickly than a micro Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 AI due the the reducing foal length as a way of getting to 1:1 without extension tubes.
Hope that makes sense...
-
Yes, it does change it slightly.
-
Yes, it does change it slightly.
Thanks, good to know.
-
Thank you Erik, Roland, Pluton for suggestions. Appreciated.
Opposite of this position there is a tiny grub screw on the focussing ring which holds the sloping front of the focus ring (in front of the scalloped focussing ring)
It will stay a mystery.... as I am reluctant to take this plastic cover off to have a look I surely will leave marks on this plastic cover. Indeed plastic....
Presumable the first piece of plastic introduced on a Nikon Auto series lens :-) (beside the lens caps of course) ;D ;D
-
I have an Ai version, and it is my most used lens. It is compact, easy to use, and does a great job. I take it with me to document jobs and job sites, and I also use it when just playing with my camera. It phentermine otc works (https://thefecaltransplantfoundation.org/phentermine-over-the-counter/) as well on my D700 as it does on my FE2.
These aren't artistic photos, but you can see what the little 28mm f/2.0 can do.
The first picture is an example of documenting a job site.
The second is a picture of a metal sculpture from a local artist, which was out in a field near his shop. The 28/2 allowed me to get a nice perspective on a life-sized sculpture. The third is a sculpture from the same artist, but this time, the photo is focused in closely on its snout and teeth.
If I was stuck with only two prime lenses, I'd keep this one and a 100mm macro. In fact, most of the time, that's exactly what I carry.
quality presents is every inch how should a classic lens should be defined
-
I have an Ai version, and it is my most used supplements comparable to phentermine (https://www.outlookindia.com/outlook-spotlight/anything-comparable-to-phentermine-available-over-the-counter--news-301041) available over the counter here lens. It is compact, easy to use, and does a great job with these . to him take it with me to document jobs and job sites, and I also use it while when just playing with my camera. It works as well on my D700 as it does on my FE2.
These aren't artistic photos, but you can see what the little 28mm f/2.0 can do.
The first picture is an example of documenting a job site.
The second is a picture of a metal sculpture from a local artist, which was out in a field near his shop. The 28/2 allowed me to get a nice perspective on a life-sized sculpture. The third is a sculpture from the same artist, but this time, the photo is focused in closely on its snout and teeth.
**
Hi! I have Ai version too, bought it few years ago but still feel like love it the most . Still I like clicking pictures by it . It exactly feels like compact. :D
-
I have an Ai version, and it is my most used lens. It is compact, easy to use, and does a great job. I take it with viasil https://ncaids.org/viasil-review-and-results/ (https://ncaids.org/viasil-review-and-results/) me to document jobs and job sites, and I also use it when just playing with my camera. It works as well on my D700 as it does on my FE2.
These aren't artistic photos, but you can see what the little 28mm f/2.0 can do.
The first picture is an example of documenting a job site.
The second is a picture of a metal sculpture from a local artist, which was out in a field near his shop. The 28/2 allowed me to get a nice perspective on a life-sized sculpture. The third is a sculpture from the same artist, but this time, the photo is focused in closely on its snout and teeth.
If I was stuck with only two prime lenses, I'd keep this one and a 100mm macro. In fact, most of the time, that's exactly what I carry.
Throughout the years he checked out numerous Nikkors and suggested that this one is worth a deeper look despite being a manual focus lens.
-
Two examples with the Nikkor 28mm f/2 (K version)
(http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8586.0;attach=40261;image) And
(http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8586.0;attach=40228;image)
Also in topic of June 2019. http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,8586.300.html (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,8586.300.html)
-
AIS 28/2
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48146743802_9c3e20de96_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gmyDws)20190628-_P3F7836d (https://flic.kr/p/2gmyDws) by foppa2011 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62383894@N02/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48109800778_0084380c5b_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2giiiDL)20190622-_P3F7238b (https://flic.kr/p/2giiiDL) by foppa2011 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62383894@N02/), on Flickr
-
i dont know but mine seems to flare more than usual. i tried an ai-s and that flares just as much too :o :o :o
-
No flare at all with my K (pre-Ai) sample.
-
No flare problem with my quite dusty AI version.
-
No flare problem with my quite dusty AI version.
I also don't have any flare problem with AI version.
-
Thank you Erik, Roland, Pluton for suggestions. Appreciated.
Opposite of this position there is a tiny grub screw on the focussing ring which holds the sloping front of the focus ring (in front of the scalloped focussing ring)
It will stay a mystery.... as I am reluctant to take this plastic cover off to have a look I surely will leave marks on this plastic cover. Indeed plastic....
Presumable the first piece of plastic introduced on a Nikon Auto series lens :-) (beside the lens caps of course) ;D ;D
I have bought a Nikon 28mm f2.8 AI-S in a very nice condition from a famous photography shop in the UK.
According to the reviews, the lens should be optically perfect, but I can see it is producing too much flare!
Also when I shoot in the woods when the sunlight comes from between the trees (high contrast situation), it
-
Share some images with the flaring ;)
-
I have bought a Nikon 28mm f2.8 AI-S in a very nice condition from a famous photography shop in the UK.
According to the reviews, the lens should be optically perfect, but I can see it is producing too much flare!
Also when I shoot in the woods when the sunlight comes from between the trees (high contrast situation), it
The AIS 28/2.8 is reasonably resistant to flare but not as good as the 28/2. In particular, if there is a wide expanse of bright overcast sky which appears in the top of the frame, there is a noticeable loss of contrast across the entire image. Shading the lens does not help unless the scene is reframed so the sky is no longer in the picture. This is true even with the newer lenses with SIC coatings, and can be a problem in some situations. Otherwise it seems to handle bright point sources of light in the frame quite well.
If flare is worse than expected, open the aperture up and shine a bright light though it to see if there is a significant layer of dust or haze internally. Also remove all filters as these can be a source of flare.
-
The AiS 28/2.8 produces a bit more flare than any of the 28/2's, or the earlier 28/2.8K, or the early 28/3.5 F/K. Both types of flare, BTW: Diffuse flare (as has been described) plus what I call acute flare (also known as ghosts or ghost images) that come from intense spot/specular light sources. I still regard it as a highly valuable lens due to it's incredibly flat field in the close up range, and the relatively low cost to purchase.
-
The AiS 28/2.8 produces a bit more flare than any of the 28/2's, or the earlier 28/2.8K, or the early 28/3.5 F/K. Both types of flare, BTW: Diffuse flare (as has been described) plus what I call acute flare (also known as ghosts or ghost images) that come from intense spot/specular light sources. I still regard it as a highly valuable lens due to it's incredibly flat field in the close up range, and the relatively low cost to purchase.
I cannot say I see much diffuse type of flare/bleeding of light into shadows with my copy of the 28 mm f/2.8 AIS. It certainly flare and ghost a lot more with sun in the frame or sunlight hitting the front element than my Nikon 12-24mm which is excellent in that regard, and even more so in IR (I tend use an NC filter on it which can be partly responsible), but otherwise it provides good contrast an delineation between quite light and dark areas. Here are two examples of challenging situations, captures at f/7.1 and f/8 respectively. (It is chipped and can be controlled from the body, thus the 1/3 aperture step, but registered as 45mm in EXIF before I re-chipped it).
#1
(https://otoien.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p1181726892-6.jpg)
28mm f/2.8 AIS @ f/7.1 on NIKON D200, 1/180s, ISO 200
#2
(https://otoien.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p1181727058-6.jpg)
28mm f/2.8 AIS @ f/8 on NIKON D5100, 1/1250s, ISO 100 (What could look like flare in the background is ice-fog, not flare.)
Not as dark shadows as my Nikon 12-24mm, but that lens is exceptional in that respect.
Edit: Hit upon another one which might have been posted here before, perhaps even better example:
#3
(https://otoien.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p1779518021.jpg)
28mm f/2.8 AIS @ f/8 on NIKON D7100, 1/50s, ISO 800
-
Does anyone have sample of infinity scenes from 28mm f2 and f2.8 for comparison? Everyone is talking about the infinity issue with f2.8 and I am curious how bad it is comparing to some counterparts.
-
I haven't had a Nikon 28/2 since before digital. I have tried to test my 28/2.8 AiS at infinity, but it has been impossible to find a test subject that has testable detail covering the full frame, or most of the full frame, at true infinity. The best I can find is the view of the city from up on a hill 2-3 miles (≈3-6 km) away---a test that only gives me a narrow horizontal strip of highly detailed subject matter. Imaging a big highly detailed brick building from across the street does not work because it's not at infinity. The building imaged from across the street shows even, sharp rendition all over the frame. The true infinity city shot shows blurry zones about 2/3 out from center, but the center and edges are sharp. If I haven't deleted the 28/2.8AiS test shots I'll find them and post them.
-
I haven't had a Nikon 28/2 since before digital. I have tried to test my 28/2.8 AiS at infinity, but it has been impossible to find a test subject that has testable detail covering the full frame, or most of the full frame, at true infinity. The best I can find is the view of the city from up on a hill 2-3 miles (≈3-6 km) away---a test that only gives me a narrow horizontal strip of highly detailed subject matter. Imaging a big highly detailed brick building from across the street does not work because it's not at infinity. The building imaged from across the street shows even, sharp rendition all over the frame. The true infinity city shot shows blurry zones about 2/3 out from center, but the center and edges are sharp. If I haven't deleted the 28/2.8AiS test shots I'll find them and post them.
Please do, thanks! I have lately acquired 28/2.8, the one with CDC but like you, I do not have any good infinity scene to test it. I visited Yosemite this October and it would be a great place for testing infinity :) However, I had 17-35 AFS with me and the lens was perfect at infinity. I am just wondering if I can rely on 28/2.8 as the only landscape lens I bring with me next time.
-
Zang, alas my 28/2.8AiS test shots have been deleted and are gone. Might be better...certainly faster... to set up your own test.
-
I found an Infinity example here:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/37324070 (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/37324070)
Strange if Nikon re-design a wide-angle lens (AI-AIS) that is not sharp at infinity?
Maybe the CRC are gone out of alignment on some samples?
-
The best I can find is the view of the city from up on a hill 2-3 miles...
A distance of 2 - 3 miles is probably a greater than ideal distance due to atmospheric influence. I would think 100 to 200 yards would be more than enough for a 28mm lens.
Dave
-
Here is one from the 28mm f/2.8 AIS @ f/4 on D200. full resolution if opened in new tab. It was possibly captured though a window though so the quality of the window glass comes into play. My impression of this copy of the lens is that performance is really good near wide open all over the frame, also near infinity. I later tested a copy of 24mm f/2 AIS, which probably resolved a little better in the center, but had really poor edges even stopped down.
(https://otoien.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p1235235371.jpg)
-
Here is one from the 28mm f/2.8 AIS @ f/4 on D200. full resolution if opened in new tab. It was possibly captured though a window though so the quality of the window glass comes into play. My impression of this copy of the lens is that performance is really good near wide open all over the frame, also near infinity. I later tested a copy of 24mm f/2 AIS, which probably resolved a little better in the center, but had really poor edges even stopped down.
The D200 is a DX camera, so it is difficult to evaluate corner performance based on this pic. all F/C/K/Ai/AiS 28mm lenses (2.8 and 3.5) have FF coverage.
I have the 28mm/2.8 AiS (1981, with CRC), and my own experience with it is positive at all distances, haven't used it lately but I chipped it, so it may come into play very soon...
Ciao from Massimo
-
Good point, I have only evaluated it in the FX viewfinder of my F4 (and F2) where it looks OK, but it is not a very accurate evaluation.
-
28 f/2 at three aperture values and distances.
NG meeting, Granada 2018
-
Zang, alas my 28/2.8AiS test shots have been deleted and are gone. Might be better...certainly faster... to set up your own test.
No worries Keith. If I get a chance, I will test the lens for sure! Will report back.
-
I found an Infinity example here:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/37324070 (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/37324070)
Strange if Nikon re-design a wide-angle lens (AI-AIS) that is not sharp at infinity?
Maybe the CRC are gone out of alignment on some samples?
Thanks Meper. I think I have seen this discussion before. With high ISO and low light condition, those pictures are not the best ones to assess the lens's quality. I notice that my copy goes a bit past the infinity. Maybe, people who complain about infinity just rely on the hard stop of the lens?
-
Here is one from the 28mm f/2.8 AIS @ f/4 on D200. full resolution if opened in new tab. It was possibly captured though a window though so the quality of the window glass comes into play. My impression of this copy of the lens is that performance is really good near wide open all over the frame, also near infinity. I later tested a copy of 24mm f/2 AIS, which probably resolved a little better in the center, but had really poor edges even stopped down.
(https://otoien.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p1235235371.jpg)
This looks very good to me. Thanks for sharing!
-
A distance of 2 - 3 miles is probably a greater than ideal distance due to atmospheric influence. I would think 100 to 200 yards would be more than enough for a 28mm lens.
Dave
A good point to make, Dave. Atmosphere is always there to throw potential gremlins into any lens test that involves great distances.
-
A general comment from the side line: we are discussing lenses which can be decades old, with an unknown history of abuse and knocks and bumps happening to them. The front CRC design is vulnerable and it is entirely possible to have lenses go out of alignment over time.
A small consolation (?) is that some wide-angle lenses with *rear* CRC can deteriorate even faster quality-wise during their life span. The Nikkor 24/2 comes to mind and I have encountered plenty of copies of this optic with sub-standard performance.