NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Ian R on October 09, 2015, 00:35:39
-
I have just fitted an Ai ring to a K version of this lens which I got cheaply due to being 'unsellable non-Ai'. After spending some time getting to know it I think that its a real little charmer! I did not expect that much but instead of the expected average performance I got some photos that I think have come out well. My findings are that it is usefully sharp at all stops, very sharp at f/5.6 and colour and contrast are as good as I could want. Of course it focuses smoothly, being a 1970's Nikkor, and the lens has no issues even when inspected quite closely. It was only £20 too, so good value. I will be using this lens a lot more.
I was trying to convince myself I needed a modern 35 like the Art or the new Tamron as I only have the 35mm Series E and 35mm is my favourite focal length, however after trying this lens my feelings for buying a new 35mm are mixed and I don't feel that I need the new lens, this older 2.8 optic is very good. Maybe not as good as the latest lenses but I would hope not with the price discrepancy.
To sum up, good sharpness, easy to focus on the ground glass, colour and contrast are fine and so a rating of 7 out of 10, only losing a little to some fringing on high contrast areas.
I add a few examples below, and any user input is appreciated.
-
These look pretty good, Ian.
I had the previous model and it was not a very good performer. Happy to see this kind of improvement. And since the first version(s) gave the 35/2.8 a poor reputation, obviously the asking price for the newer models still is agreeable.
-
These look pretty good, Ian.
I had the previous model and it was not a very good performer. Happy to see this kind of improvement. And since the first version(s) gave the 35/2.8 a poor reputation, obviously the asking price for the newer models still is agreeable.
You are right about the poor reviews. There must be some truth to them, however with maybe my version these don't apply? A first for me is being able to use it wide open and not getting smeary dark corners. Being able to use wide open freely without undue quality loss is important I think. I kind of wish I had discovered this lens sooner as my 35mm E is not very good at all - not much bite or clarity.
-
The 35/2.8 Nikkor underwent very significant changes in its optical design. The "K" and subsequent versions were far superior to their predecessors. However, they might have arrived too late on the scene to alter the tainted reputation this lens had at that point.
The 35/2.5 SE Nikon is excellent for IR, but might not be equally well performing for visible light captures.
-
Nice write-up. Nikon have made many 35/2.8 lenses over the years - it must have been a popular lens with their design team. It started with the Nikkor-S 3.5cm which was released shortly after the Nikon F in 1959. This lens required high levels of accuracy during assembly so production was slow - only about 7400 units were made. It was replaced by the more compact Nikkor-S 35mm in 1962, which was easier to assemble. It was a popular lens and remained in production until 1974 when it was replaced by K version. This version uses a more modern 6-element design. It was upgraded to AI in 1977. In 1979 it was replaced by yet another model, which was produced in AI and AIS variants. About the same time Nikon also released the Series-E 35/2.5. Both lenses use a similar 5 element optical design. The series-E version is designed to be faster, more compact and cheap, so I guess the new AI version has fewer design compromises so is better corrected overall. Some reviews say the previous 6-element design is still the sharpest but I have not compared them.
You can read about the first three versions here: http://www.nikkor.com/story/0038/ (http://www.nikkor.com/story/0038/)
Beyond these, Nikon also made a number of other slow 35mm lenses, in the form of the PC 35/3.5, PC 35/2.8 (old style), PC 35/2.8 (new style, same optics but now multicoated) and the last PC 35/2.8 (new optical design with black shift knob)
-
I have owned two copies of this lens(the 6-element K/Ai version) for many years. Ian's report sums up my feelings about it well. I'll add that wide open, it shows some nervous bokeh with certain backgrounds. The line-doubling seems to disappear by f/4.
The lens has a very nice lack of barrel distortion. The follow-on 5-element version gained more noticeable barrel distortion.
-
Thank you for the input - and the link Roland. Instead or having various scattered lenses and having to think about what to take I am making up a much tighter lens selection and moving the rest on. This 35mm lens will be my main 35 I think. Fast enough, sharp enough, not too heavy, easy to use.
-
Fast enough, sharp enough, not too heavy, easy to use.
"Not to heavy" is the understatement of the year. It weighs almost nothing.
-
I have owned two copies of this lens(the 6-element K/Ai version) for many years. Ian's report sums up my feelings about it well. I'll add that wide open, it shows some nervous bokeh with certain backgrounds. The line-doubling seems to disappear by f/4.
The lens has a very nice lack of barrel distortion. The follow-on 5-element version gained more noticeable barrel distortion.
I'm fairly sure the older Nikkor-S 35/2.8 has smoother bokeh, but it's also softer overall. The newer Ai/AIS version may also have better bokeh but I don't think it's any sharper, and as you say it has some barrel distortion. The K 35/2.8 is the only 35mm prime I know of which is free of distortion (maybe the PC lenses also)
-
that is one of my favourite lenses :o :o :o
i got it from the junk box, the tag said that there is fungus/haze on the rear element but there was none when i checked it ::) so i got a mint 35mm f/2.8 ai for the price of a junk ::)
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1697/25317433100_948c263fba.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/EzdsPf)HAW_8876 (https://flic.kr/p/EzdsPf) by mrBabaero (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31768064@N03/), on Flickr
the secret of this lens is that it has very little distortion for a 35mm so it is perfect for architectural work. the bokeh is also good according to some. it is also sharp wide open and does not really get any better after f/4.
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1516/25070103833_ab9bed560d.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/EcmQrx)HAW_8896 (https://flic.kr/p/EcmQrx) by mrBabaero (https://www.flickr.com/photos/31768064@N03/), on Flickr
i know this lens because i use it a lot for street. i hate the 35mm focal length for street though, because it forces me to get really close. 50mm is more my thing.
here it is being mutilated for a tear down for my blog www.richardhaw.com
-
got this one just for fun. :o :o :o
i find that the Nikkor-S version is not so bad. it sure is sharp wide open on this guy. the only thing i hate is that this lens tends to have a lot of cleaning marks on the front element on the samples that i saw on the used market. this one has a few but not as bad as the ones i saw.
one reason why i got the older version was because of the focus scale. it has a longer throw and as you can see from the pic below, there are more numbers between 1m and 5m. those numbers are important to me for street ::)
-
The "K" version of the 35/2.8 Nikkor is surprisingly sharp and as already stated, very low in geometric distortion. I got a nice one the last time I visited Erik Lund in Copenhagen, and he helped me AI-modify it in a perfect manner. Add the CPU and it turns into a highly useful, sharp and inconspicuous compact optic that even performs great in IR.
-
got this one just for fun. :o :o :o
i find that the Nikkor-S version is not so bad. it sure is sharp wide open on this guy. the only thing i hate is that this lens tends to have a lot of cleaning marks on the front element on the samples that i saw on the used market. this one has a few but not as bad as the ones i saw.
one reason why i got the older version was because of the focus scale. it has a longer throw and as you can see from the pic below, there are more numbers between 1m and 5m. those numbers are important to me for street ::)
The AI 35/2.8 you have is the newer version - 5 elements in 5 groups. This one has mild barrel distortion and a very short focus throw of only 100°. The AIS version with the same optics has a longer focus throw of 120° (the only case where an AIS lens has a longer focus throw than the AI version)
However if you prefer really long focus throw, look for the K or early AI version. The focus throw is about the same as the Nikkor-S version. This one has 6 elements in 6 groups, distortion is nearly zero and I think it's a bit sharper, although the bokeh may not be quite as rounded.
-
Good examples Ian.
From what I understood from others too, the K-Ai, is very well regarded (6 elements in 6 groups). Serialnummer range from 773 to 870. Prices on Ebay gone up to 150 euro and more. I got one a few weeks ago in a box with lenses and am surprised by it's quality. The bokeh is beautiful too. It's a definitely a keeper. BTW I rate this Lens higher than a 7. Comes closer to a 8,5-9
Some examples here: EDIT (Serialnumber 791xxx)
-
After Erik had AI-modified my 'K' 35/2.8 (the hard way, by Dremel operation on the aperture ring ...) and the CPU was added, we went for a stroll in Copenhagen. I think the 35/2.8 performed extremely well on my Df and probably will be a standard walk-around item for this camera, perhaps in combination with the 85/1.8 K.
My lens is 795xxx so in the first half of the production run.
-
The "K" version of the 35/2.8 Nikkor is surprisingly sharp and as already stated, very low in geometric distortion. I got a nice one the last time I visited Erik Lund in Copenhagen, and he helped me AI-modify it in a perfect manner. Add the CPU and it turns into a highly useful, sharp and inconspicuous compact optic that even performs great in IR.
speaking of copenhagen, i lost the address of one of many camera shop. i want to send something there in summer :o :o :o
back to the topic. so, my 35mm f/2.8 Ai's optic should be the same as the K? sorry im just confused right now. opening up lenses, i see nikon change thing as they go through the production. the changes are subtle but can render interchangeability of the parts impossible such as position of the screws and shape of an element's edge(fit). but the change in optical formula is something major. the Nikkor-P is an example of that.
-
The AI 35/2.8 you have is the newer version - 5 elements in 5 groups. This one has mild barrel distortion and a very short focus throw of only 100°. The AIS version with the same optics has a longer focus throw of 120° (the only case where an AIS lens has a longer focus throw than the AI version)
However if you prefer really long focus throw, look for the K or early AI version. The focus throw is about the same as the Nikkor-S version. This one has 6 elements in 6 groups, distortion is nearly zero and I think it's a bit sharper, although the bokeh may not be quite as rounded.
Hello. i was not aware that there was another rework of the optic :o :o :o
this is starting to get confusing for me.
Another reason for getting this is the funny typo. Nikkor is mispelled as niikor frequently by japanese people and i got this as a joke to make fun of some of my friends who make this kind of mistakes hahaha
-
Good examples Ian.
From what I understood from others too, the K-Ai, is very well regarded (6 elements in 6 groups). Serialnummer range from 773 to 870. Prices on Ebay gone up to 150 euro and more. I got one a few weeks ago in a box with lenses and am surprised by it's quality. The bokeh is beautiful too. It's a definitely a keeper. BTW I rate this Lens higher than a 7. Comes closer to a 8,5-9
Some examples here: EDIT (Serialnumber 791xxx)
nice pic of the working class neighborhood :o :o :o the lines look pretty straight
-
The AI 35/2.8 you have is the newer version - 5 elements in 5 groups. This one has mild barrel distortion and a very short focus throw of only 100°. The AIS version with the same optics has a longer focus throw of 120° (the only case where an AIS lens has a longer focus throw than the AI version)
However if you prefer really long focus throw, look for the K or early AI version. The focus throw is about the same as the Nikkor-S version. This one has 6 elements in 6 groups, distortion is nearly zero and I think it's a bit sharper, although the bokeh may not be quite as rounded.
Roland (and folks), the Ai/K version of 35/2.8 is exactly what I'm looking at for my pano work. Why don't you stop adoring this one in order to keep the second-hand price low!!! :o :o :o
-
Roland (and folks), the Ai/K version of 35/2.8 is exactly what I'm looking at for my pano work. Why don't you stop adoring this one in order to keep the second-hand price low!!! :o :o :o
hey you should join me this thursday. we are going to shoot some underground sexy stuff in nakano :o :o :o
-
Hello. i was not aware that there was another rework of the optic :o :o :o
this is starting to get confusing for me.
All the optical variants with serial numbers are listed on my site: http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#35 (the thick bar separates different optics, the thin line is for different versions or barrel styles)
Nikon released no less than 4 different 35/2.8 optics between 1959 and 1981, five if you count the series-E 35/2.5, and seven if you count the two PC versions. Must have been a favorite with the designers :)
-
speaking of copenhagen, i lost the address of one of many camera shop. i want to send something there in summer :o :o :o
http://oneofmanycameras.com/
-
All the optical variants with serial numbers are listed on my site: http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#35 (the thick bar separates different optics, the thin line is for different versions or barrel styles)
Nikon released no less than 4 different 35/2.8 optics between 1959 and 1981, five if you count the series-E 35/2.5, and seven if you count the two PC versions. Must have been a favorite with the designers :)
your site must be getting like 30-40 hits a day from me alone! :o :o :o
thank you very much for your effort.
35 2.8 is a very practical lens. that is probably the reason why Nikon has made so many. when i was freelancing at the newspaper, the editor encourages us to use 35mm. anything wider than that he says distorts too much, exaggerating the story. anything longer will not show enough of the environment. this old guy believed in showing the truth so he always told us to have some BG in the picture to show some context.
i will probably not buy another 35, i am quite happy with these 2. i shot with the Niikor-S this afternoon (the one with the typo) and it is pretty sharp at f/8. i am OK so far with it's optics, but of course it is no match for the Ai in terms of clarity. the newer lens is also superior due to a brighter viewfinder compared to this Niikor-S where the viewfinder is a bit dark.
-
http://oneofmanycameras.com/
thank you! i lost mikeno62's message :o :o :o
it was he and daitocamera that inspired me to share my notes to the world!
i dream of a future where everybody can just share notes and replacement parts freely
-
PS: modified text after merging the two threads on the 6-element K/AI lens. The link to Roland's website was already included so I have removed that one too.
Herewith a few shots taken yesterday-evening after receiving my copy of this lens. All hand-held taken with D750. No 1-3 at ISO12.800, f4, 1/60. No.4 ISO200, f8, 3sec (and moving the camera in circles). I would have pushed aperture and lower shutter speed if I had a tripod with me but I did not. I also wanted to see how the lens performed at 2.8 and 4 instead of its - apparent- sweet spot of f8.
Processing: import NEF into LR with Nikon Standard camera profile, pushed shadows a bit, no NR (except for LR's standard color NR) to see how it works out. #3 is cropped and I removed some other reflections to put emphasis on the one seen in the photo
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.visualcue.photography%2Fimg%2Fs11%2Fv34%2Fp910120092-5.jpg&hash=d8277303eed4851b1f39ea3da4560b456da2bbee)
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.visualcue.photography%2Fimg%2Fs5%2Fv130%2Fp548527362-6.jpg&hash=da937f83eff42cd2b0505879c2d4667ee0bcf2d4)
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.visualcue.photography%2Fimg%2Fs4%2Fv65%2Fp748104045-5.jpg&hash=8f19aca454d0ea658c4dfadf01c5af6859bc4efd)
(https://nikongear.net/revival/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.visualcue.photography%2Fimg%2Fs2%2Fv61%2Fp669380437-5.jpg&hash=1a5e16b8f91e952d7f1d12da8f28b8704fb59a39)
-
Last one is amazing :)
First images suffer from darkness,,,
-
Last one is amazing :)
First images suffer from darkness,,,
Normally I would not have posted them.
-
https://richardhaw.com/2016/05/28/repair-nikkor-35mm-f2-8-ai/
I actually use this as my lucky lens :o :o :o
i tend to get good deals when i have this with me ::)
the 35/2 is winning me over lately but this one has it's charm
-
This isn't too dark ... :D
Copenhagen wall art with the 35/2.8 K after Erik had AI-modified it and it had got its bespoke CPU.
(Df)
I'll remove this photo, as it already is posted (by virtue of the merged thread) and replace. Later tonight.
-
Thanks, Peter, for sharing your experience with this intriguing lens! I'm afraid that your initial examples are too dark to judge the image quality in the peripheral areas. So, please keep posting!
PS: Mods: if you think this belongs to a generic 35/2.8 thread or another thread, perhaps you are willing to move it?
No, I would like this particular optics NOT to be mixed with other 35/2.8 Nikkors.
-
There are some images of this lens posted here before : http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,1751.0.html (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,1751.0.html)
One example
(https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1751.0;attach=10317;image)
-
OK, should be this guy on the left. I always get mixed up with this series :o :o :o
-
OK, should be this guy on the left. I always get mixed up with this series :o :o :o
Those are both in the series. The focus ring overlapping the DOF markings is diagnostic. Check the links on Roland's site.
I've had an unconverted K version for a while, unused and forgotten. I just bought an AI copy and rediscovered the K copy. Now that my three-week long cold (which wreaked havoc with all my plans) is finally but slowly dissipating, I hope to get out this weekend and try it out.
Edit: The one on the left is the K version and the one on the right is early AI; both are the 6-element version which is what I was trying to say.
-
There are some images of this lens posted here before : http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,1751.0.html (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,1751.0.html)
I am sorry I missed that one. Perhaps the mods can merge the threads to get one thread for this specific lens, just in case people are looking for info?
Impressive bokeh
-
OK, should be this guy on the left. I always get mixed up with this series :o :o :o
I find it is easiest to tell the difference between the 6-element 35/2.8 K/Ai and the successor 5-element Ai/AiS by looking at the front of the lens. The later 5-element unit has a more curved or bulbous front element compared to the earlier 6-element unit. I only have the 6-element K/Ai, so cannot post comparison photos. You can see the difference fairly clearly in the photos at Roland's site.
Merging this thread with the earlier thread is a good idea.
-
Despite a few protesters, I decided to merge the two separate threads on 35/2.8 AI & K into a common one.
-
I did not see a thread yet on this specific lens, so I thought to start one . I took the liberty to combine the two series as they share the same characteristics as displayed in Roland Vink's spreadsheet. See http://photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#35 (http://photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#35)
I'm not finding the first photograph too dark. It's an extremely long dynamic range with a very high ISO where the camera has less DR to work with. If it's an NEF then maybe use the flat picture control and work with LCH to get a better hint of what's happening in the shadows.
Photo number two probably has a problem with cobalt blue in the sky. It's not sky color. The artificial light it probably playing its roll.
The forth photo is great. I like it.
Dave Hartman
---
The first photo is a bit darker on my MAC so the experience is more like other on it.
-
Despite a few protesters, I decided to merge the two separate threads on 35/2.8 AI & K into a common one.
Could there be a link left at the old thread? I just wasted about 10-15 minutes trying to find the other thread that no longer exists.
I went from my Windows computer to my MAC to have a look and the thread I was posting on was gone (which ever one it was). I got a bunch of error messages and started searching.
I don't see a way to find where the moved thread went. Maybe there is one? First it's there and then it isn't.
-
The "old" thread now is *the* current one.
The various post titles merely reflect the one you are reply to.
-
Despite not being entirely recovered, I sneaked out into 12-degree C weather to get a few shots with this lens on my D7200. I paid for it with a coughing fit afterwards but it was worth it.
First, an uncropped shot showing behavior when shot at more of a distance. Note the flare in the upper left corner; this lens seems to flare easily and I had to forego some compositions as a result.
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/1/355/31656114876_0e77563a21_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QekS55)Grassy curves (https://flic.kr/p/QekS55) by Bill de Jager (https://www.flickr.com/photos/99349448@N06/), on Flickr
Then, some closeups. These are substantially cropped.
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/1/746/30851294574_cb8a5b7747_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/P1dX2Y)Photinia leaves (https://flic.kr/p/P1dX2Y) by Bill de Jager (https://www.flickr.com/photos/99349448@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/563/31656116736_426d7d86a1_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QekSC9)Coast live oak (https://flic.kr/p/QekSC9) by Bill de Jager (https://www.flickr.com/photos/99349448@N06/), on Flickr
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/1/266/30882789523_60d3b183e5_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/P41nok)Nandina berries (https://flic.kr/p/P41nok) by Bill de Jager (https://www.flickr.com/photos/99349448@N06/), on Flickr
-
Considering these lenses never were designed to do their best at close range, results are pretty nice.
The older f/2 35mm was well known to flare badly under difficult light conditions. My impression with the 35/2.8 K is that it performs much better in this regard. However there is no denial the modern 'nano' coatings reign supreme.
-
There are a lot of wonderful pictures in this thread.
I ask a heretic yet honestly interested question:
Could these pictures not have been taken with a collection
of other lenses? With 1.2 and 1.4 lenses and other super
fast glass I understand and see uniqueness of rendering
like the finger print of a 1.2/85L or a Noct or a 1.4/105.
Does uniqueness still show at aperture 4 or 8?
-
Bill: is that a Keyline System in #39.1???
-
I have just fitted an Ai ring to a K version of this lens which I got cheaply due to being 'unsellable non-Ai'. After spending some time getting to know it I think that its a real little charmer! I did not expect that much but instead of the expected average performance I got some photos that I think have come out well. My findings are that it is usefully sharp at all stops, very sharp at f/5.6 and colour and contrast are as good as I could want. Of course it focuses smoothly, being a 1970's Nikkor, and the lens has no issues even when inspected quite closely. It was only £20 too, so good value. I will be using this lens a lot more.
I add a few examples below, and any user input is appreciated.
Great captures esp. The cat and the flowers
-
To answer Frank's question: yes and no.
The mellow and delicate 'drawing' of these older lenses can be difficult to emulate in particular when the lens is stopped well down. Modern lenses usually convey more contrast and micro details, not always required by the subject.
-
Bill: is that a Keyline System in #39.1???
Frank, that's an area of landfill with a drainage system to channel runoff safely.
-
...this lens seems to flare easily and I had to forego some compositions as a result.
My apologies if this is redundant...
Use a lens hood probably a Nikon HN-3. Don't use a filter unless you feel strongly about it. Shade the lens front element or filter with your hand or a hat. Properly shading the front element or filter, when possible, will make more difference in daylight than whether you use a filter or not. Maybe you normally do all this. :)
Best,
Dave Hartman
Do use a filter for sand, dust, salt spray, etc. so always carry a protection filter.
-
My apologies if this is redundant...
Use a lens hood probably a Nikon HN-3. Don't use a filter unless you feel strongly about it. Shade the lens front element or filter with your hand or a hat. Properly shading the front element or filter, when possible, will make more difference in daylight than whether you use a filter or not. Maybe you normally do all this. :)
Best,
Dave Hartman
Do use a filter for sand, dust, salt spray, etc. so always carry a protection filter.
Thanks, Dave. I should have grabbed a hood before leaving the house. I did use my hand to shade the lens, but the sun was low in the sky and at one point my back was against a hillside. So, I ended up being constrained more than usual while at that particular location. When there was no way to keep the sun off the front element the flare was severe. I had no problem with the sun while taking the other shots because I had more freedom to choose my perspective at those locations.
-
http://www.nikkor.com/story/0038/
Basically a question for Roland or whoever is knowledgeable. I hope it's ok since this is for the Nikkor-S.
According to the article above, there are 2 types of Nikkor-S. when and which sn did it take place? :o :o :o
-
http://www.nikkor.com/story/0038/
Basically a question for Roland or whoever is knowledgeable. I hope it's ok since this is for the Nikkor-S.
According to the article above, there are 2 types of Nikkor-S. when and which sn did it take place? :o :o :o
The big changeover resulted in SNs jumping from 927516 down to 176911. See here (http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#35). Click on the specifications and serial numbers lines at the top of the page to toggle between different information displays for versions of each lens. The serial numbers page has a more detailed breakdown of lens versions.
-
The first Nikkor-S has the focal length marked 3.5cm only. The optics are based on a Tessar-type group.
Serial no 920101 - 927516 (maybe a little higher)
The second Nikkor-S has the focal length marked 35mm. The optics are based on Gauss-type group. This lens is also more compact.
Serial no 176911 - 392610 (maybe a little higher)
-
I see. OK, I overhauled both versions but I didn't notice any large differences between the 2 in optical design since it felt like the same lens unless I have both side-by-side to see it.
OK, that makes sense. The difference was so subtle that the case of the objective was hardly changed :o :o :o
I just overhauled a late Nikkor-S and I was scratching my head because they all felt the same to me despite me overhauling 3 so far
-
I made these shots with this thread in mind. 35/2.8K/Ai, D800, identical processing settings. f/2.8, f/5.6, f/16. You can watch the extreme sides sharpen as the aperture is stopped down. Not much flare...that was a bright sky behind the shed. It stays pretty sharp at f/16. EDIT: Lateral chromatic was auto-corrected by Lightroom/ACR.
-
Hmmm....the image quality of 35/2.8K/Ai seems noticeably better than that of 45P...
-
Different lenses. The 45P has a kind of wild charachter, with more vivid colours and better bokeh. The 35/2.8 K is sharp, with lots of contrast and minimal distortion. I prefer the 45P over the 35/2.8 K
-
Yeah, John, I know that. I was just thinking about a lens for stitching panos. 50/1.8G works nicely, but often I want a bit more AOV. I find 45P very handy for the purpose and was marveled by the absence of CA. Sometimes I just want a bit more sharpness at wider apertures for single shots. Yes, I know I require too much, but you know...
-
Ah, I understand. For Stitching is the 35/2.8 K an excellent candidate. But the same applies for a number of lenses, like the other 35's and the 28/2 to mention a few at the wide end.