NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Tristin on December 13, 2015, 10:35:49
-
I am looking to acquire an ai or ai-s wide angle lens, 24-28mm and no slower than f/2. The 28mm f/2 seems to be held in higher regard than the 24mm f/2, but I can not find any user reports between the ai and ai-s versions of the 28mm f/2. Appreciative of any opions and insights.
-
Tristin, the Ai version has a longer focus throw which makes the focusing in the live view mode more convenient.
If you look for the Ais version, you may want to get the last versions which has NIC coating. The NIC lens elements are in dull green color, whereas the conventional multi-coated elements show more eye-pleasing multiple color.
-
Although both are 9 element designs, they differ in optics. Near limit is 0.3 and 0.25 m for AI and AIS, respectively. Focus throw is longer with the AI.
I prefer the AI, but both will do you fine service.
-
Mongo has owned both the 28mm f2 AI and the 24mm f2 AI or AI-s.
The 28mm f2 is a beautifully crafted lens and in Mongo's view, an excellent performer in almost all situations. It is however, larger and quite heavy compared to the 24mm f2. In Mongo's experience, the 28mm well outperforms the 24mm f2 at the wider open apertures (and that is where you would presumably use these fast lenses most). It is sharp from the get go. The 24mm closes the gap when stopped down a fair bit at about f5.6 from memory. Sorry, but cannot recall how each performed re flare etc
Mongo has since sold both lenses but if he had to keep one of them for sharpness and performance generally over the other , it would have easily been the 28mm.
-
28/2: sample variation might exceed the intrinsic differences between typed. I have a 28/2 AIS, pleased with it. However, to get satisfactory corners, f/4 is needed. That's my usual night shot setting (on Df). Larger apertures are useful for close-ups mainly. Very high microcontrast when stopped down.
Edit : my copy is a late AI (ser. No. 559609). I got confused because the coating indeed is greenish.
-
Ah have the ai version, like it a lot should use it more often, great for street, makes a nice bag with a 50/1.2 and 105/2.5.
-
I have the ai version. Sharp, contrasty, beautiful rendering, and of course well made. Only quibbles are vignetting wide open and the bokeh can in certain circumstances be less than pleasing (perhaps I am spoiled by Nikon's current primes).
-
Edit : my copy is a late AI (ser. No. 559609). I got confused because the coating indeed is greenish.
Airy, the green color of NIC is really "dul"l, because the coating reflects less amount of light. The elements of your Ai version should appear to be "beautifully" green.
-
Ah have the ai version, like it a lot should use it more often, great for street, makes a nice bag with a 50/1.2 and 105/2.5.
That is exactly the trio I am looking to carry! ☺
-
For the Df the 28K/2.0, 45P/2.8 and 85K/1.8 is a great combo too. (but there are many combinations possible ;) )
-
All 28mm 1:2 Nikkors are very closely related optically. This type started with the Nikkor-N 28/2 in 1970. In its day it was a a very advanced fast wide-angle lens with 9 elements in 8 groups, fully multicoated on all surfaces (second after the 35/1.4), and with floating elements (third after 24/2.8 and 35/1.4).
The original style lens had an all-metal barrel with scalloped focus ring. The barrel was upgraded to the modern style with rubber focus ring at the end of 1975. The optics were refined at that time, probably by using improved glass materials and adjusting the curvature and spacing of some elements, but the overall optics remain basically the same as before. It was upgraded to AI in 1977 with no further changes.
In 1981 it was upgraded to AIS. The close focus distance was reduced from 0.3m to 0.25m, so the AIS is preferred if you like closeups (but if you like wide closeups the AIS 28/2.8 is even better - it focuses even closer and performs better at close range, although perhaps not as good at far distances). I'm not sure if Nikon used the same optics and simply extended the focus range, or if the optics were tweaked again. The AIS 28/2 remains an 9-element 8-group design in a very similar (if not the same) configuration as before. Some reviewers say the AI version is better, maybe the AIS sacrificed some infinity performance for improved at close range, but I've not seen any direct comparisons to support this and it could easily be a case of sample variation.
The total focus throw is the same for AI and AIS versions (120°) but the AIS obviously squeezes in a greater range so the focus throw at far and medium distances is less than the AI equivalent.
The aperture blades also changed, the AI and earlier versions had curved aperture blades so OOF blurs had a nicely rounded (but not fully circular) look. The AIS has straighter aperture blades so the blurs are more angular 7-sided polygons.
Late AIS 28/2 have the newer Super Integrated Coating (SIC), from about no 825xxx to the end of production. This coating is a light yellow-greenish color. Earlier Nikon Integrated Coatings (NIC) coatings were deep red/green/blue depending on the viewing angle. The AIS 28/2.8 had a similar change, compare the coatings. NIC:
(http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/ais2828.jpg)
SIC:
(http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/ais2828n.jpg)
I don't know how much difference the newer coating makes, the older coatings were already very good and the 28/2 is known for being resistant to flare.
-
Airy, the green color of NIC is really "dul"l, because the coating reflects less amount of light. The elements of your Ai version should appear to be "beautifully" green.
Ok, understood. Anyway the distance scale (limited to 0.3m) was not ambiguous. My mistake. And yes, 28/2 + 50/1.2 + 105/2.5 is a nice combo for a Df.
-
I really appreciate all of the information, thanks everyone. I considered the 24mm but don't want to resort to f/2.8.
Bjorn, why do you prefer the Ai? I suspect it may be the curved aperature blades but do you have more reasons?
-
Probably because of the longer focus throw. Plus it handles shooting against strong light sources well. My copy vignettes little wide open and is fairly sharp even at f/2, this might vary between samples though.
I guess the main reason for my AI preference is I got it very cheap a long time back. Seems foolish to spend money on something else that might not be better at all. Those 5 cm extra reach in the near range aren't that critical and the AIS f/2.8 performs better for such shooting anyway.
-
Frederik Rasmussen also reports a slight optical advantage to the AI version on his web page : http://www.momentcorp.com/review/index.html (http://www.momentcorp.com/review/index.html)
But here too, no evidence is shown.
-
I had the NC-Auto Aid. It was one of the sharpest and most reliable lenses I ever had.
But.
I do not like 28.
I love 35.
I love 24.
But 28 is kind of neither either.
Well that is just me.
There are lots of great 35 options and quite a few 24s.
-
PS: If the 2.0 is what you aim for you might search for a decent 2.0/24. Grear lens if you hit a good sample. I sold mine after buying the 1.4/24G. Pity? I do not know. Lots of lens in a small package, but I am not a colllector and since my eyes are bad, AF works nice for me.
-
Airy, thanks for that link! Together with Bjorn, Mir and Roland's pages it will serve me really well. I love finding pages like these! :D
I will be looking for an Ai version it seems, thanks to all for the prompt and insightful help. :)
Frank, while I would prefer slightly wider than 28mm I haven't found an alternative ~f/2 at a price I can afford currently. The f/1.4s and f/1.8s are pricier, bigger, and I really enjoy the feel of the manual Nikkors. If money was no barrier, I'd be giving the Zeiss 25mm f/2 a spin. Someday perhaps. :)
-
The total focus throw is the same for AI and AIS versions (120°) but the AIS obviously squeezes in a greater range so the focus throw at far and medium distances is less than the AI equivalent.
Late AIS 28/2 have the newer Super Integrated Coating (SIC), from about no 825xxx to the end of production. This coating is a light yellow-greenish color. Earlier Nikon Integrated Coatings (NIC) coatings were deep red/green/blue depending on the viewing angle. The AIS 28/2.8 had a similar change, compare the coatings. NIC:
I don't know how much difference the newer coating makes, the older coatings were already very good and the 28/2 is known for being resistant to flare.
Roland, thanks for the correction. Yes, I meant "S"IC in my posts above. Tristin, sorry for the confusion.
-
The 28/2.0 AIS has always been one of my faves along with the AIS 35/1.4 & AIS 50/1.2 & AIS 50/1.8.
I have the 24/2.0 AIS and it is rather meh, imho. Not as sharp. Prone to that veiling flare thing at 2.0 while the 28 does not do that at 2.0. I don't think it is a sample thing because I've tried 2 of the 24/2.0. Granted, only two still does not make a large sample.
-
Andrea, I am not going with the 24mm primarily because of it's flaring issue which I have heard much of. Too bad. :-\
-
Andrea, it took me nearly 10 years of searching before I found a perfect 24/2: meaning it is sharp, contrasty, and keeps flare well under control.
-
Is yours a late serial number AIS 24/2? I wonder if the newer SIC coating made a difference?
-
s.n. 213875 so is not amongst the very latest I presume.
I have tried quite a number of these 24/2 and most are just dull and bland.
-
Bjorn, how does your good copy 24mm f/2 compare to the 28mm f/2s?
-
Tristin: The new AF-S 1.8/24G is not in your budget?
-
Well I *could* afford it, but photography comes second to my band. Which is even more expensive than photography :'( Even money aside, I really enjoy the feel of quality manual focus lenses. Clicky aperature rings and buttery focus rings . . . mmmm!!! :D The process is just as important as the results for me. When I can justify stepping above the costs that the Ai and Ai-s lenses currently demand, I will likely give some Zeiss glass a spin and see how that fares.
-
I see you buy a lot of lenses currently.
I can assure you that the 300 Euro I spent for the 4/200 Micro was very well invested in "Clicky aperature rings and buttery focus rings". The best thing about this lens is the way my subject snaps into focus, the precision I can apply through the long focus throws adds very much to the feel.
A great 2/24mm is difficult to find as Bjørn has experienced (I had a great one from the start), but at 200 Euro a pop you can sell it for the price you got it for anytime.
-
Bjorn, how does your good copy 24mm f/2 compare to the 28mm f/2s?
Haven't shot them side by side, but if for some reason I should encounter spare time, they sit in front of me and beg to be taken out for a shooting session :D
I admittedly am tempted by the new 24/1.8 as well, despite it being 'G' and thus not optimal for the Df.
-
A quick-and-dirty comparison shows the 24/2 has more field curvature in the near range and slightly less contrast than the 28/2, at least in the wide open setting. Provided they are properly focused, they otherwise appear pretty similar.
My impression is the 24/2 performs better than the 28/2 when stopped far down. Sometimes one needs to use a wide-angle lens in that manner too.
One of my all-time favourite captures with the 24/2 in fact was conducted with the lens at f/22;
(Altschlossfelsen formation in Germany, near the French border. The sandstone formation is 250 million years old, from Trias)
-
Here are the two contenders 24/2 (AIS) and 28/2 (AI) Nikkors. The 24 to the left and 28 to the right in front of my Nikon Df. They are shown with the correct lens hoods; HK-2 for the 24 and HN-2 for the 28.
In the background, two matching lenses for a small travelling kit: 85/1.8 and 105/2.5. One can match and mix at will so all combinations (24|28) + (85|105) are feasible. If required, add either a fast normal 50-class lens (50/1.8, 1.4, or 1.2) or a Micro-Nikkor 55 if there is expected close-up work for an assignment.
All lenses are CPU-modified of course.
-
Bjørn, your collection is missing the 45P 8)
-
You know my view on the 45P: too small for my fingers. Otherwise it just might be an additional middle-position candidate.
-
The HK-2 is what I dislike most with my 24mm/2. Other than the hood that allways slip off in the bag, I second Bjørn's comparison of 24mm/2 and 28mm/2. Both mine are AIS.
-
That's strange, HK style hoods usually fit on very securely via the thumb-screw. You can use the HN-1 hood instead if you want a hood which won't fall off.
-
I have done further test shooting with the various 24 & 28 Nikkors at my disposal. Turns out my 24/2, once perfect, now definitively is out of alignment and this is pretty apparent at the widest apertures. No wonder the 24/2 has such mixed reputation if it gets this easily knocked out of kilter. Still decently sharp for landscapes at f/5.6 and beyond, but the new 24/1.8 is much sharper. Oh well, maybe Erik can bring the f/2 back to its former glory. I had substantial food for thought.
I'll initiate a separate thread on the 24/1.8 once the current bitingly cold weather abates - my lungs now react too strongly to the air chill and I'm not that keen of getting pneumonia once again.
-
Thanks for all the info guys! :)