Nikon AF 24mm f2.8D - your experience?

[Anirban Halder]

Hi everyone!
I'm planning to get one Nikon 24mm AF f2.8 prime lens. Not brand new, but an used one. I'm sure many of you have used this lens. Can you please share your experience? Any known limitations? I will use it in D200 for the time-being and soon will use it in FX body too. Hoping to use it for landscape and occasional street.

Thanks.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I think you should reconsider. The AF 24/2.8 never was highly regarded. I have just used it a few times and was left unimpressed.

There is a new 24/1.8 out just now and if Nikon has pulled similar tricks with that as they did to the 20/1.8, this might be a hot candidate.

[Frank Fremerey]

Do not buy it. I had to buy and sell 8 of these until I found a good one and it is still not as good as any third party Zoom
at this focal length. Do not buy it.

In the MF Nikkor offerings there are many better lenses  too.

long for something else like the current 1.8 Nikkors

85
50
35
24
20

I did not test the 24/1.8G yet but because all the aforementioned are superb I dare to predict the 24 will stand in line.

[Anirban Halder]

I think you should reconsider. The AF 24/2.8 never was highly regarded. I have just used it a few times and was left unimpressed.

There is a new 24/1.8 out just now and if Nikon has pulled similar tricks with that as they did to the 20/1.8, this might be a hot candidate.

Very fair point. Thanks a lot Bjørn for the advice and prompt reply.

Do not buy it. I had to buy and sell 8 of these until I found a good one and it is still not as good as any third party Zoom
at this focal length. Do not buy it.

Thanks lot Frank for candid feedback. Much appreciated. Looks like no point investing in this one.

[Frank Fremerey]

Funny. Bjørn and I wrote the same in parallel. I am slower. Softkeys on my Galaxy

[Anirban Halder]

Funny. Bjørn and I wrote the same in parallel. I am slower. Softkeys on my Galaxy

You are also super-prompt Frank. 

[armando_m]

I have one, and I have not been able to sell it, used it only a few times and I agree with the above assessments

[Hugh_3170]

I have the 24mm AF version that came out prior to the 2.8D.  As far as I know the optics for the two lenses are the same and in the instance of my copy it was sadly only an average performer.

As Bjørn, Frank, and others have suggested I would wait until the new 24mm f/1.8 has proven itself and go for that if it performs well.

If you are on a budget and if 28mm will work for you, then there are several Nikon 28mm lens options that are superior to my AF 24mm f/2.8.  If manual focus is an option for you and your intended uses, then the choice is even wider.

[Ian R]

24mm is my favourite focal length for street photography and visits to London, however apart from Sigma and their 'Super Wide' I have never seen another Nikon 24mm fit lens apart from the Nikon models. I never tried the AF 24mm, however in June I purchased a brand new 24mm f/2.8 Ai-S which is of current production with the latest SIC.

Trying it, I am quite pleased, but not very pleased with it if you catch my drift. It needs f/5.6 for the sides to lose the fall-off and loss of sharpness and f/8-11 seems best, then it is very good. I don't have as wide as 24mm in any zoom so can't compare, however if Nikon is introducing a new 24mm then I will be interested to see how it performs. Saying that, my 24mm manual focus lens is good enough for a 36x24 print if I take care using it.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The 24 mm f/2 and f/2.8 designs are old and developed with film in mind. Apparently they have experienced compatibility issues with DSLRs (to varying degree). Thus I will be eager to see what the new 24/1.8 deliver. I was raised on the golden combination 24/2.8 + 105/2.5 Nikkors from my first period with the venerable Nikon F, way back in the late '60s (first wide angle was 35/2.8, which I quickly replaced with the 24/2.8 when that lens was launched a few years later, i n1968 if memory serves).

[Anirban Halder]

I have one, and I have not been able to sell it, used it only a few times and I agree with the above assessments

Thanks Armando.

24mm is my favourite focal length for street photography and visits to London, however apart from Sigma and their 'Super Wide' I have never seen another Nikon 24mm fit lens apart from the Nikon models. I never tried the AF 24mm, however in June I purchased a brand new 24mm f/2.8 Ai-S which is of current production with the latest SIC.

Trying it, I am quite pleased, but not very pleased with it if you catch my drift. It needs f/5.6 for the sides to lose the fall-off and loss of sharpness and f/8-11 seems best, then it is very good. I don't have as wide as 24mm in any zoom so can't compare, however if Nikon is introducing a new 24mm then I will be interested to see how it performs. Saying that, my 24mm manual focus lens is good enough for a 36x24 print if I take care using it.

Thanks Ian for sharing your experience.

The 24 mm f/2 and f/2.8 designs are old and developed with film in mind. Apparently they have experienced compatibility issues with DSLRs (to varying degree). Thus I will be eager to see what the new 24/1.8 deliver. I was raised on the golden combination 24/2.8 + 105/2.5 Nikkors from my first period with the venerable Nikon F, way back in the late '60s (first wide angle was 35/2.8, which I quickly replaced with the 24/2.8 when that lens was launched a few years later, i n1968 if memory serves).

Thanks again Bjørn. I'll sure save my bucks for 20/1.8 or 24/1.8.

[FGAng]

Reviving this thread with a slightly different question...

I had the AF 24mm f/2.8 as my first wide angle beyond 28mm, back in 1990's.  Used it only a bit but was never pleased with it.  Sold it to fund the AFD 70-300ED some years later.  I did not have another 24mm Nikkor until much later, and I shooting style for wide was developed around 20mm f/3.5 Ai (I still regret selling it).  I bought the 24mm f/2.8 K lens and got it modified by Nikon, used it sparingly, was ok with the results.  I am not sure if it is due to my preference to 20mm or the performance.

I just picked up another beaten up 24mm f/2.8 K, also factory modified, that I will need to put in some work.  Perusing Roland's excellent data base, I found out that there are really only 2 versions of the 24/2.8: the 9/7 version up to K, and 9/9 from Ai and beyond.  Earlier literature, like Moose Peterson's Nikon Handbook, and Bjorn's post a few before this, indicated that the 9/7 design is good.  Other classic Nikon lens forum threads (like Fred Miranda) seem also to indicate a strong performer in the 9/7 design.

Question: what is your opinion of the 2 versions, 9/7 vs 9/9? 

My faint memory of the 9/9 AF lens is that it is bad, as bad as the AF 28mm f/2.8 - which along with the modern kit lenses, are the worst Nikkors I have experienced.  The AFD 28/2.8 is only slightly better, and should really go into the local Craiglist ...

[richardHaw]

the 24/2.8D was one of the sharpest primes on my D700/D90
sharper than the SIGMA super 24 than I used to shoot a billboard of the Marina bay sands with

[Roland Vink]

I also have a K 24/2.8 which is AI converted and I like it. I can't say I've shot with it wide open, but at medium apertures it is pretty sharp on my D600. Some barrel distortion is present but it is fairly mild. It has a short focal length that I shoot stopped down so it's hardly a "bokeh" lens but out of focus backgrounds are generally pleasing and well rounded. When shooting into strong sun, contrast remains relatively good, but you do get a lot of green ghost reflections.

I've not shot with the AI or AIS 24/2.8 but they were well liked in the days of film. From what I read, sharpness is on a similar level. Images I have seen show "nervous" double-line blurs in the background, so I think the older version wins here. When shooting into the sun it handles ghost reflections better but generalised flare is worse. The 9/9 design is more compact than the older 9/7 optic, maybe more effort went into making the lens smaller than improving performance? The AF versions may suffer from slack in the CRC unit as many reviewers say it's not quite as good as the manual focus versions, even though the optics are the same.

[David H. Hartman]

I have no experience with the 24/2.8 AF versions. My 24/2.8 is the AI version. What I can say is vignette is quite strong wide open. It exhibits strong flare and ghost. I can tell if a UV filter was on the lens or not: 13 small, hot ghost if a filter was used, only 12 if not. This observation was on a Nikon D5. Flare was strong either way I can't remember if the sun was near or in the frame. My best guess is near. The hood (HN-1 / HN-2?) is not a particular help. A hand shading the lens is more useful.

I recently bought an AF-S 20/1.8G ED. I'm quite pleased with the lens. I can crop back to a 24mm angle of view on a D800 with out much sacrifice.

I hope this helps,

Dave Hartman