28mm f/2

[Fons Baerken]

Are there significant differences between the ai or ai-s models?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The difference in near limit, 0.3 vs 0.25m for the AI and AIS respectively, would indicate some internal differences. Both are 9 element optics though, so Nikon might just have tweaked the original design as they tend to do over time.

My 28/2 is the AI by the way. Pretty sharp even wide open, but corners need a little stopping down (to f/4 or thereabouts) to be very crisp on many subjects.

[richardHaw]

they're still expensive 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

... and still good optics. Perfect for unobtrusive shooting and long hiking trips where weight and size are additional regulators of amount of gear carried.

[Fons Baerken]

Df 28mm f/2 @5.6 ai version

Reason i ask i want a 2nd copy mine shows quite a bit of wear, options the ais version which is more expensive than the ai version on the 2nd hand market, other options are the afs28mm f/1.8g or zf28mm/2.

[longzoom]

Both are good, AIS is a bit more contrast. But both are clearly show their age. AFS 1.8 version is not sharper, but delivers better contrast and color, less distortions of every kind. ZF 28 is from different league, price reflecting that. But my own favorite is ZF 25/2, not the 2.8 older version. It is my own experience, please note! Everyone's way would vary.   Good luck!  LZ

[Fons Baerken]

Thanks Longzoom.

[paul_k]

Bought my copy somewhere in the very early 80's to complement my standard 'Trinity' set of the 2/28, 1.4?50mm and 2.5/105mm (another iconic lens had, and in this case even sold to get a 2/85 as I hardly ever managed to get a sharp image with it, probably due to my shooting technique using it hand held with shutter speeds of around 1/60th and under)

To be quite honest, with apologies in advance for the heresy, never saw the exceptional qualities of the lens so many rave about  .
Simply bought it to have a wide angle lens, and used it under circumstances where he focal length was useful/mandatory, like eg PJ work, events or (wedding) receptions etc

Sturdy, well built lens though, dropped mine several times on concrete/tiled floors, even to the point the 'rabit ears' broke of, never saw ant negative result on the optical quality nevertheless. It nowadays is part of my 'stable' of pre Ai and Ai manual glass I assembled over the years and started (re) using with in particular my DF
Recently even added a pre Ai early Gauss 2.5/105mm I found in A+ condition for a bottom price, hope for better results with the higher ISO the DF allows

Back in those days already tried my hand at fashion, and following the taste of that period preferred out of focus backgrounds, which of course is a bit of a challenge with a 28mm, even when used wide open

Here's one of the rare pictures I shot using it that way, shot in the early 80's at the site of the then still under construction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in The Hague, nicknamed 'De Apenrots' (the monkey island, as it resembles more or less similar looking constructions you often find at zoo's) by the locals

[David H. Hartman]

When I started in 1970 for no reason better than the "Holy Trinity" for the masses was a 28/3.5, 50/2.0 and a 135/3.5; yes for no better reason I didn't want to own these lenses. With a fatter wallet the Trinity was a 28/2.0, 50/1.4 and 135/2.8.

Twice I bought a 135/3.5 as it was the only lens longer than 105mm that I could afford.

Even after buying a 50/1.8 and 135/3.5 I did not buy a 28mm lens. I found situations where a 35/2.0 wasn't wide enough and I could not backup more so I use a 24/2.8, backed up as much as I could to avoid the fiddler crab human and then cropped. I shot a lot of Tri-X and too much cropping was to be avoided.

Now reading Bjørn Rørslett's review and noting great flare and ghost resistance a not too exciting but very practical focal length made sense. Then about the time people were selling their souls to buy a Nikon D70 a Nikon FM3a, 28/2.0 AIS and 135/2.8 AIS popped up on KEH.com. I took a chance and bought the lenses. They were like new lenses, in the box with the latest Super-IC coatings.

I recently viewed a video on tramps by John Free and note that he used a Nikon F and a 28mm lens. I think the lens was a 28/2.0. The 28/2.0 may not excite but is a very useful tool. John used it to get in close while including the seroundings to complete his story.

The 28/2.0 performs fine wide open but is better at f/2.8 to f/11. I have not formally tested my 28/2.0 or 135/2.8. I hardly have time for photograph these days.  I spend most of my time helping a paralyzed friend.

Dave Hartman

I'll have to correct typos and other errors later. I'm bird sitting a mischievous cockatoo and "Birds just want to have fun!"

[John Geerts]

Reason i ask i want a 2nd copy mine shows quite a bit of wear, options the ais version which is more expensive than the ai version on the 2nd hand market, other options are the afs28mm f/1.8g or zf28mm/2.

Didn't like the 28/1.8 G -  unreliable indoors with the AF, and Manual focus is not easy with that lens although the colours and contrast especially at close range was not bad at all.   

Replaced it with a crisp 28/2 K-version.

The latest 28/1.4 G might be the best (and expensive) replacement in the 28mm Nikkors world.

[Akira]

I used 28/1.8G only with a DX format camera (D7000) but didn't like it either.  I observed massive LoCA.  It's shame, because 28mm lenses are the ideal and real "standard lens" on DX: the focal length is the same as the diagonal length of the frame.

[longzoom]

I used 28/1.8G only with a DX format camera (D7000) but didn't like it either.  I observed massive LoCA.  It's shame, because 28mm lenses are the ideal and real "standard lens" on DX: the focal length is the same as the diagonal length of the frame.

        My one had almost no CA, but was a little bit decentered to the left. To 3.5 this imperfections was covered by DOF, mostly, on FF.  Yes, we have to accept the sample variations as a sad reality... THX!  LZ

[pluton]

I haven't owned a Nikkor 28/2 since the the early N- version I had for a while in the 1990's.
 I have had a ZF 28/2 for almost ten years across D3 and D800 cameras.
The ZF is heavier by 150g, and is a pretty good lens all around.  I wish it had a rubber focus grip like the Nikkors.
It has a pronounced curved field of focus way out at the edges of the 24x36 frame.  The focus plane is convex to the camera...the opposite of the common case with wide lenses.
The appearance of the curvature goes away by f/4 or so.
Here's a wide open shot that shows it:

[Fons Baerken]

Was curious about the zeiss had read about the pronounced field unevenness, dont see many examples, in general the 28mm seemed to have lost most of its early appeal among photographers.
Thanks for all your thoughts here.



Here wide open corrected the perspective may mean the loss of some acute sharpness, so i like the iq very natural where it  portrays the flat light of the season perfectly.

[John Geerts]

Yes, I love the 28/2 lens for indoors  too

at f/2 on the D600