[HELP] Lens recommendation for 28mm

[F2F3F6]

Hello, another good candidate as ultrawide zoom is the AFS-G 3,5-4,5/18-35mm. Good resolution from 5,6 and very good contrast. Not much distorsion. Lightweight: 380g, but not as solidly built as a pro-lens.

Many tests say it's as good or better than the AFS VR 16-35 (a lot of distorsion for this one...).A good travel lens.

I tested it against my old AFS 2,8/17-35 and optically the cheap 18-35mm (360€ paid and as new) was more even than the old champion...

Today the price between a 16-35VR and a 18-35 is only about 200€ difference.

So the question is VR or not VR ? Or: a fixed focal lens vs a zoom ? You are the only one who can answer these questions...Make a good choice !

[Birna Rørslett]

I would narrow down the competition by finding answers to (a) is VR really necessary and (b) is AF required. Decide on the two options and the rest follows.

My personal view is that VR on wide angles is not that important if you have good shooting technique and the same applies to AF. So my choice would be to find a good copy of the 28/2.8 AiS and test it to ensure it hasn't beeen subjected to knocks that makes it badly decentered. The 28/2 AI is an excellent alternative albeit a little heavier. Both lenses are a little unusual in having the CRC elements in front and not in the rear, hence their susceptibility to coming out of alignment if you aren't careful about protecting the lens from bangs and knocks in front.

I would forego zoom lenses for a travel kit.

[MEPER]

Just to show how one of my old Nikkor-H 28/3.5 performs I shot a couple of my usual test short. Low light handheld. Camera Z50 with Z-adapter.
First image is shot at 3.5 (ISO 100) + additional 100% crop. I tried to focus at the "Ensrettet" sign. Second image at 8 (ISO 400) with additional 100% crop.
No adjustments at all. Just a straight Raw conversion in NX-Studio. Lens performs well......at least on a DX sensor. Lens is an old Kogaku type.

[sythanh14]

I have a 28-105D (which was my wife's favorite carry-around lens on the F100).  ON the D7100 it performs quite nicely,  with no stuck apertures, and it reports the correct focal length too.  If your camera is not malfunctioning with other lenses, I suspect you were right to send that one back, but would not necessarily eliminate the lens from your search if another bargain shows up.  Even if you go for a more dedicated prime 28, this is a pretty decent walking-around lens, especially with the 1:2 closeup.  My least favorite thing about it is the huge pie-plate of a hood.

Yeah I will see for that and other lenses too. I guess I was not experienced enough to spot the problem while I met the seller so it took me sometime to get to know it. Now that I know what to look for, it will be easier to see if there's problems. I'm not very sure if it's my camera or it's his lens but my camera worked fine with a newer DX VR lens that I sold a while ago. I will be testing it against the lens that I'm buying so it will be fine. Worst is it's actually my camera that is the problem, but then so be it...

Hello, another good candidate as ultrawide zoom is the AFS-G 3,5-4,5/18-35mm. Good resolution from 5,6 and very good contrast. Not much distorsion. Lightweight: 380g, but not as solidly built as a pro-lens.

Many tests say it's as good or better than the AFS VR 16-35 (a lot of distorsion for this one...).A good travel lens.

I tested it against my old AFS 2,8/17-35 and optically the cheap 18-35mm (360€ paid and as new) was more even than the old champion...

Today the price between a 16-35VR and a 18-35 is only about 200€ difference.

So the question is VR or not VR ? Or: a fixed focal lens vs a zoom ? You are the only one who can answer these questions...Make a good choice !

Thank you for your recommendations. I actually also looked for the 17-35mm and the 18-35mm variations as well, they are either very rare, or sold at the same or higher price than the 16-35mm in my post.
But definitely if they come at good price, then why not.
To be fair at this focal range, VR will just be good to have and doesn't make too much sense. But if it goes pas 50mm then I really like having it on. I will think properly.

I would narrow down the competition by finding answers to (a) is VR really necessary and (b) is AF required. Decide on the two options and the rest follows.

My personal view is that VR on wide angles is not that important if you have good shooting technique and the same applies to AF. So my choice would be to find a good copy of the 28/2.8 AiS and test it to ensure it hasn't beeen subjected to knocks that makes it badly decentered. The 28/2 AI is an excellent alternative albeit a little heavier. Both lenses are a little unusual in having the CRC elements in front and not in the rear, hence their susceptibility to coming out of alignment if you aren't careful about protecting the lens from bangs and knocks in front.

I would forego zoom lenses for a travel kit.

You have reasons obviously. And as I just said above, for me it matters if it's maximum focal goes past 50mm. So if I decide to go for such zoom lens, I prefer having it on.

I haven't really had any MF lens in my life, and I'm not sure if the wider focus throw makes it easier to focus or not. Plus, as I explained, I found myself really prone to point and shoot, and unless I use a tripod, I kinda move around a lot, so AF definitely helps me catch shots while I move around.
Saying all that, only after the vacation/travel that I know for sure if I do have time to adjust my compo/focus, or will I just keep jumping around. If the dead time is there and if I actually have time to MF, I will invest in MF in the future. For now, I will leave myself a larger breathing room by going after AF.

However leaving the MF lenses in my post also shows that I'm not that tight of a person and can be weaved away, if the lens is exceptional (which are the AI/AIS), and if I find a bargain.
To be honest I tried bargaining an AI lens for 100, and an AIS lens for 200, but they wouldn't let them go. Had they agreed with what I proposed, I might have got away with that last week.

I agree and I prefer myself to have a kit of prime lens, over a zoom lens. Beside convenience, I appreciate image quality as well as speed and bokeh. However this time around, I'm not really down to spend much on a prime lens, hens leaving me with the last two contestants. When the time is right, I really want to fulfill my prime kit, ranging from 20 to at least 135. But for now, the convenience takes over.

Just to show how one of my old Nikkor-H 28/3.5 performs I shot a couple of my usual test short. Low light handheld. Camera Z50 with Z-adapter.
First image is shot at 3.5 (ISO 100) + additional 100% crop. I tried to focus at the "Ensrettet" sign. Second image at 8 (ISO 400) with additional 100% crop.
No adjustments at all. Just a straight Raw conversion in NX-Studio. Lens performs well......at least on a DX sensor. Lens is an old Kogaku type.

Those are some very nice shots you have. I won't doubt the quality of this Nikkor-H lens. I even found one for dirt cheap - 70 euros, and it's available.
I was on the point of just taking it home and play with it when I found out that it was not converted... so it won't play nice with my D700 mount...
Conversion process can be painful, so I will look after converted lens, or maybe just watch out for AI(s) lenses instead...

[MEPER]

Ok.....I can see that on a D700 body it has the "stupid" plastic aperture ring. On older bodies the ring was metal and the small tap could be flipped up so "non-AI" lenses could be mounted.
The nice thing when I got my D5200 body was that the ring was absent so non-AI lenses could just be mounted.

I guess it is not enough to just remove the "rabbit ears" on a non-AI lens......a cut-out is also needed?

Prices on non-AI lenses raised a bit after Z-bodies was on market as those bodies takes almost everything (with adapter).
I don't think non-AI lenses are a lot cheaper than AI-lenses......this was the case some years back. AI'ed Nikkors were valued a lot higher......back then......than now.

[Matthew Currie]

Yes, a non-AI lens must generally be milled to clear the AI follower on the camera.  The usual method is to mill out for clearance, with the end of the cut at the correct point to operate the AI follower,  thus making it safe and converting to AI at the same time.  The early (no mount screws showing) version of the 28/3.5 actually does clear that follower safely, but at the same time this also means it cannot be converted by milling.  I converted mine by adding a little tab, using the mounting of the rabbit ears to hold it on.  Quick and dirty, a bit of scrap aluminum.  Looking at the picture, I see I really should at least unbend the end!  Shame on me.   If I troubled to find longer screws I could have put the rabbit ears back over it, but didn't bother.  It works fine.

[MEPER]

I tried to mount my 28/3.5 Kogaku version on an EM-body. If "rabbit-ears" is removed it will clear the aperture follower on body.
The Kogaku version is the one with "hill and dale"  aperture ring. The "rabbit-ears" sits in a "dale" so it should be ok.....

[Matthew Currie]

All the manual lenses I've converted by milling the rings will clear with rabbit ears on, but because pre-AI ones need to have the mount and ears milled back almost to the mounting holes (even taking off a bit of the screw heads), it's kind of delicate, and I haven't bothered on the last couple.

Remember, though, that if you have an automatic aperture lens that does not engage the meter follower, it will not meter correctly.  The meter will always think it's shooting wide open.  You can, of course, ignore the meter and do it manually, just as one does on a D5x00 or 3x00, or read the meter when it's set wide open, and compensate a stop for each stop down.  It's a problem with pre-AI T4 mounts, which are automatic but owing to construction cannot be converted at all.

[sythanh14]

It's been two weeks since the last comment I've made.
I took the 24-85mm VR lens and I had a more than successful trip to Italy, I think.

The lens is so well rounded and I did not really miss any major if not minor details while shooting.
I barely took out my nifty fifty from my backpack and the zoom lens just stayed on my camera all along the 5 days.

Thank you all for your recommendations. I just want to share some of the beautiful shots I have captured around my trips.

[Erik Lund]

Very nice travel images! Good you found a universal zoom that fit your demands.
Very nice light in the last pano

I recall the old 24-85mm had a lot of distortion on some focal lengths so back the I opted for the 28-70mm AFS f/2.8 heavy but very nice image quality and focus speed.

[Erik Lund]

Yes, a non-AI lens must generally be milled to clear the AI follower on the camera.  The usual method is to mill out for clearance, with the end of the cut at the correct point to operate the AI follower,  thus making it safe and converting to AI at the same time.  The early (no mount screws showing) version of the 28/3.5 actually does clear that follower safely, but at the same time this also means it cannot be converted by milling.  I converted mine by adding a little tab, using the mounting of the rabbit ears to hold it on.  Quick and dirty, a bit of scrap aluminum.  Looking at the picture, I see I really should at least unbend the end!  Shame on me.   If I troubled to find longer screws I could have put the rabbit ears back over it, but didn't bother.  It works fine.

That is quite a unique Ai conversion  If it works it works,,,
Just a heads up that not all Non-Ai lenses clear the aperture follower on modern DSLR's without a modification - So please take care mounting the lens for the first time - I's an expensive repair,,,

[Matthew Currie]

That is quite a unique Ai conversion  If it works it works,,,
Just a heads up that not all Non-Ai lenses clear the aperture follower on modern DSLR's without a modification - So please take care mounting the lens for the first time - I's an expensive repair,,,

Yes indeed, in fact MOST non-AI lenses will not clear the follower, including some of the other early Nikons of the same vintage as that 28.  I have a couple of very early 200/F4 Q lenses which definitely do not clear, and must be milled to comply. A few non-Nikkor lenses resemble the 28, and clear, and I had to do a similar bodge on a Vivitar 20, but the 28 is the only Nikon lens I've so far run across that clears in this way.

[Hugh_3170]

I have an early 35mm f/2.8 which I have modified in an identical manner to your 28mm shown in Reply #021 on the 7th of September 2022.


 

Yes indeed, in fact MOST non-AI lenses will not clear the follower, including some of the other early Nikons of the same vintage as that 28.  I have a couple of very early 200/F4 Q lenses which definitely do not clear, and must be milled to comply. A few non-Nikkor lenses resemble the 28, and clear, and I had to do a similar bodge on a Vivitar 20, but the 28 is the only Nikon lens I've so far run across that clears in this way.

[Sören Hese]

I am using the Nikkor 28mm f2 AIS since a while - not for general photography but more for special purposes with a tilt composer on a Sony A6k, but I like the lens and it sharpens nicely up once you close the aperture to 2.8.  When I need something like a 28 i mostly go to 24 but thats personal preference. I prefer the 20/24/50/85  steps when on fixed focal length (should replace the 85 with 105). For paid shootings I prefer the 14-24/24-70 duo. Best! Sören