NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: DanAa on June 01, 2017, 17:36:58
-
What’s your current choices/preferences of the 1.8 AFS-Nikkors (20-24-28-35-50) for nature/landscape photography compared to other Nikkors, MF Nikkors as well, for FX-Nikons.
-
My current preferences, after trying the 35mm f1,8 (FX), 50mm f1,8 and 85mm f1,8 AF-s lenses is to take the 50mm and leave the rest at home. I just don't like the purple/green fringing a lot, and that's near impossible to correct without destroying other parts of my images.
Instead I take
16mm f3,5
20mm f3,5 Nikkor-UD
24mm f2,8 Nikkor-N.C
5cm f2 Nikkor-S/50mm f1,4 Nikkor-S, 50mm f1,8 AF-S/55mm f1,2 Nikkor-S.C or 55mm f3,5 micro Nikkor depending on my mood that day
85mm f1,4 AF-D
I have not yet found a 35mm I liked, but the 35mm f2,8 PC Nikkor might fit that bill.
I just don't like the 28mm focal length, so to me, that doesn't exist
-
I am using the 20/1.8 extensively. For someone who is a fish-eye addict I have to admit that I pick up the 20mm more often than not, even more than the 24/1.4, go figure :)
-
I am using the 20/1.8 extensively. For someone who is a fish-eye addict I have to admit that I pick up the 20mm more often than not, even more than the 24/1.4, go figure :)
Ditto! 20/1.8..
-
The 24/1.8 AFS is actually pretty good.
-
Rcently I started to use 20/1.8. I briefly used 24/1.8. Both are superb lenses. The only reason for my replacement is that I wanted to go wider and closer. The largest magnification factor of 20/1.8 is 15% larger than that of 24/1.8. The optical quality of both lenses are well comparable.
50/1.8G is my all-time favorite. So far as the optical quality is concerned, it is the best 50/1.8 ever made. It is impressively resistant to flare and ghost. I found it superior to 45/2.8P in this regard.
-
I use the 20mm f/1.8 and 24mm f/1.8 for landscape and other uses. Both produce stunning starbursts.
The 24mm is slightly better IQ than the 20mm. Still I like the 20mm FOV.
For reportages I use the 35mm f/1.8 a lot which is good but has a bit nervous bokeh at times.
I also used equivalent Fuji XF 14mm and 16mm which both don't produce such clear starbursts. I sold all Fuji stuff...
@Akira, thanks for the hint - I'll try the 50mm f/1.8
-
I own the 85, 50 and 20
my fav and most used given my kind of photos is the 85
then 20
least used being the 50
-
I am using the 20/1.8 extensively. For someone who is a fish-eye addict I have to admit that I pick up the 20mm more often than not, even more than the 24/1.4, go figure :)
The 1.8/20 is outstanding. My 1.4/24 does not see much use since I got it
-
My weakest manual focus wide Nikkor is my 24/2.8 AI with terrible flare and ghost in unfavorable light. Vignette is also a problem with the 24/2.8 AI.
I was considering the AF-S 24mm f/1.8G ED but I really like the 20mm angle of view and there was a $100.00 instant rebate on the AF-S 20mm f/1.8G ED so I went with it. I can always crop back to the 24mm FOV on a D800 so it was a good choice.
The AF-S 20/1.8G ED is pretty good concerning flare but not as good as the 20/3.5 AI. I was worried about vignette with 20/1.8G but I haven't noticed problems. I also own a 20/2.8 AIS and it can be troublesome to focus on the D800.
I can easily recommend the AF-S 20/1.8G ED.
Dave Hartman
-
@Akira, thanks for the hint - I'll try the 50mm f/1.8
Daniel, you are welcome.
Like all the other AF-S lenses, 1.8G lenses are not free from potential focus error. You would need to calibrate them at Nikon service. All of my 1.8G suffered the problem. After the calibration, all worked superbly without any need of AF fine tuning in the camera.
-
PS: the 1.8/50 is a good lens, esp when used wide open at the near limit it adds some magic. I compare it to the 2.0/50 in character. Since I managed to buy a 1.4/58 shortly the 50 is only used for very low profile jobs. My new 1.8/50G went straight to the service. Badly decentred as factory setting...
-
I avoid all these 1.8 G for one bad reason triplet : the plasticky feel, the absence of aperture ring, and the subpar MF handling. I got the 50/1.8G together with the Df and, admittedly, it is a very good lens. The 28/1.8 G is the other one I have (bought 2nd hand). Nice, but somehow I prefer the old and inferior 28/2.0 AI (wide open, the new G is the clear winner). Other ones untested, since I'm well covered (Sigma 24/1.4 A; excellent; 20/3.5 UD, Zeiss 35/2...)
Anyway, my favourite FLs are not available from the 1.8G family. I like 50mm above all, but in fact, I tend to use 40 and 58; 50 feels "in between". 40 (not: 35) is better suited to my general photography, while 58 is most adequate for casual portraits (while still +/- usable for general photography). So: Voigt 40/2, and the false twins make me happy (Noct and Nokton; the latter is a near-perfect lens in terms of crafting and ergonomics, while the former has indeed a unique rendering).
-
My personal estimation is all the 1.8G's are solid performers. I have the 24/35/85. But choice of focal length is a personal and subjective decision, otherwise you really can't go wrong with any of them. (The idea already shared regarding the 20mm 1.8G and the ability to crop it to 24mm seems very solid to me - unless of course you are fond of the 24mm FOV). I end up using the 24/85 for landscape, such as it is...I'm not much of a landscape guy.
-
I used 35/1.8G and 28/1.8G also, but only on D7000. I didn't calibrated them at the Nikon service, but I was not very impressed.
A 28mm on DX was my ideal "standard" lens in terms of the angle of view. But for some reason, I didn't like the lens. 35mm was also nice as "standard" lens on DX, but, when combined with D7000, the combo was heavier than the combo of D750 and 50/1.8G. Now I'm happy with the latter combo.
-
I forgot the 1.8/85G ... Sorry .... One of my favourite optics of all time. You can see the very significant wear on mine.
-
I'm happy with my AF-S 24/1.8. Sharp across.
-
As evidenced by Dan's mountain plateau (Hardangervidda?) picture, the 24/1.8 handles strong light sources with aplomb and grace. Needless to say this presumes the front element is immaculately clean ... something I often struggle with as I shoot first, then look afterwards.
-
The 1.8/20G is also extremely versatile, from Architecture to group shots FX/DX, night time or daytime, even low light portraits, like the one I just developed:
-
As evidenced by Dan's mountain plateau (Hardangervidda?) picture, the 24/1.8 handles strong light sources with aplomb and grace. Needless to say this presumes the front element is immaculately clean ... something I often struggle with as I shoot first, then look afterwards.
Yes, Bjørn, Hardangervidda, easternmost part (Vegglifjell in Rollag/Nore&Uvdal)
-
excellent portrait, Frank
-
I sold all my 1.8 G AF-S Nikkors as I didn't like it's rendering. (only kept the 50G that came with the Df)
For landscape/nature (on the very wide side) I prefer:
17-35/2.8
16/2.8 AF-D Fisheye
20/4 Ai
10-20 Sigma 4-5.6 (on DX)
-
excellent portrait, Frank
Thank you. And look at the resolution power of the lens:
http://zentralkraft.com/KO7_1992_00001.JPG
I made a 50x75 qcm print and was far from the limit! Plus the development is not very good.
-
A bit oversharpened, at least for web display. Agreed.
-
A bit oversharpened, at least for web display. Agreed.
I confess to not have managed to preserve all details. Here is the RAW: http://zentralkraft.com/KO7_1992.NEF
-
I avoid all these 1.8 G for one bad reason triplet : the plasticky feel, the absence of aperture ring, and the subpar MF handling.
These lenses are obviously not made with manual focusing in mind, a clear weakness IMO. However, I cannot fault the construction quality. It is plastic, but I see no reason to think that the aperture and autofocus mechanisms are mechanically weak. Am I wrong?
-
These lenses are obviously not made with manual focusing in mind, a clear weakness IMO. However, I cannot fault the construction quality. It is plastic, but I see no reason to think that the aperture and autofocus mechanisms are mechanically weak. Am I wrong?
I'm no expert here but I think the light weight of the plastics used is important for AF performance. The slight slop in the focus ring may also have something to do with AF performance. I'm no fan of either but these features do not adversely affect their usefulness as AF lenses.
The biggest issue for me is size. I can accept the shortcomings of my AF-S 105/2.8G ED VR Micro but the size, it's a Honker. The year round resident Canadian geese put their wings over their beaks and snicker when I mount the lens. The VR is very useful when a tripod can't be used. Storing the lens in a bag is a pain. The AF-S 105/2.8G ED VR is no replacement for the 105/2.5 AI/AIS or 105/2.8 AIS Nikkors.
I don't see these lenses as poorly made but they are made to a price point in today's market.
Dave Hartman
-
the 20mm 1.8G is probably my favorite lens right now. I love that lens and I find it far superior to the older 20mm lenses.
-
I sold all my 1.8 G AF-S Nikkors as I didn't like it's rendering. (only kept the 50G that came with the Df)
....
Same reason for me and I got rid of the 50 as well.
I'm more into the 1.4's (24G, 58G and 105E), but it takes a while to get them. :D
-
the 20mm 1.8G is probably my favorite lens right now. I love that lens and I find it far superior to the older 20mm lenses.
I cannot fault my 20mm 1.8G either.
(http://www.coldsiberia.net/nikon/_DSC0532_aftershot_pro_2000.jpg)
-
I'm happy with my AF-S 24/1.8. Sharp across.
Yes, but could it have been even better if you had used an aperture of, say, F/8 or F/11 instead of F/13? Just a thought.
-
The aperture setting also has an important influence for the appearance of the sun rays and size of the solar disk. Thus one has to find a balance between need for stopping down and keeping the required image quality. Fixed recommendations for aperture is tricky at best.
-
I cannot fault my 20mm 1.8G either.
(http://www.coldsiberia.net/nikon/_DSC0532_aftershot_pro_2000.jpg)
Is the purple and green fringing shown in the branches characteristic of the 20mm f/1.8 lens? Seems a bit strong.
-
Most lenses will have troubles with excessive contrast like that of the derelict house Per Inge posted. Some of the fringing might be removed in the RAW converter though (if the software supports such corrections).
-
Is the purple and green fringing shown in the branches characteristic of the 20mm f/1.8 lens? Seems a bit strong.
Yes, it is typical.
It is also typical of every lens I have ever come across against similar subjects.
-
The aperture setting also has an important influence for the appearance of the sun rays and size of the solar disk. Thus one has to find a balance between need for stopping down and keeping the required image quality. Fixed recommendations for aperture is tricky at best.
I guess the best recommendation is to state that the best aperture - like many other parameters - depends on exactly what one wants to convey and how.