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

[longzoom]

2017-01-15 002-1-2 by 2017-01-15 002-1 by longzoom, on Flickros/longzoom/]longzoom[/url], on Flickr2017-01-15 002-1-3 by longzoom, on Flickr      Those old monsters are carrying the big enigma, sometimes. I did not like the old 24/2.8 AFD, coze I was not lucky with the samples I owned. But, some broken sample of Nikkor 20/2.8 AFD came to me. Oiled aperture, forced to move, so, deformed a bit. Misaligned front block, delivering strong CA and absolutely soft uneven sides. It took me 8 hours to restore it. BTW, nobody ever open it, so I wonder how it left the premises it was born at,  in so misaligned conditions. Oily blades is not counting against Nikon!    So the test image wit 2 crops - from center and from extreme corner. F4.0,  D810.   On your judgement!  LZ

[FGAng]

Thanks Rick, Roland, David and Longzoom.  I think I have the answers I am looking for, and unless one 9/9 piece drop in front of me at a price I cannot refuse, I will give it a miss. 

I always admire the balanced way of response I get from here, clearly a legion of gentlemen and ladies (not in that order).  Thank you.

I will do some minor fixing of the latest acquisition, and wait for Rick's write-up, which I learned will be a while more, as it is in the queue.

[pluton]

I had the 9/9 AiS 24/2.8 and the 9/7 K(NIC)24/2.8, but only on film.  Based on that experience, I'm more interested in trying then older 9/7(but multi-coated) flavor on digital if an inexpensive copy comes along. 

[FGAng]

I had the 9/9 AiS 24/2.8 and the 9/7 K(NIC)24/2.8, but only on film.  Based on that experience, I'm more interested in trying then older 9/7(but multi-coated) flavor on digital if an inexpensive copy comes along.

My feeling exactly.  Thanks.

[Akira]

I've also had a factory Ai'ed Nikkor N C 24/2.8 (metal hill-and-dale focusing ring) during the film days, and have only good memories with it.  It was sharp, and its distortion was smaller than that of the later 9/9 version that my friend had.

The only problem was the yellowish hue probably caused by the high-refractive-index glass of the time.

[pluton]

The yellowish hue was definitely a turn-off in the film days, less so in the digital era.  Some yellowish-rendering lenses---the 85/1.8 F/K/Ai and the 28/3.5 F/K/Ai come to mind---had their yellowish color cast noticeably reduced when Nikon went to multi-coating.

[John Geerts]

ome yellowish-rendering lenses---the 85/1.8 F/K/Ai and the 28/3.5 F/K/Ai come to mind---had their yellowish color cast noticeably reduced when Nikon went to multi-coating.

Not the 85/1.8 K which has already multi-coating.  The 50/1.4 SC does contain some yellow cast but hardly noticeable.    On topic,  I also liked the 24 N C more than the later version.

[pluton]

Not the 85/1.8 K which has already multi-coating.  The 50/1.4 SC does contain some yellow cast but hardly noticeable.    On topic,  I also liked the 24 N C more than the later version.

Sorry if unclear;  I meant that if comparing the early, non-rubber gripped, non-multi coated 85/1.8 with a K/Ai unit, the MC one has distinctly less yellowishness.  I have seen both at the same time.

[Peter]

I just bought a bundle of Nikon Af lenses af 60-D micro, NIKON AF 28-85 af and a 24-D af.
I compared the 24mm with my Sigma af Super Wide II and a Quantaray Tech-10 24mm af, the Nikon was just an edge above the other two.
I have had good results with the Quantaray Tech-10 the Nikkor is good but not great for the going price.
The Quantaray 24 is still running under $100.00 but the Sigma is getting a bit of a price increase.

[JJChan]

Anirban
I got my AF24-D after reading Bjorn R's review with film. It has a nice render - not super sharp - but always 'nice'
I dragged a D200 out with it today (38degrees at farm!) and took a few shots for you - mostly f8 but also f2.8 to show ok bokeh. SOC with resizing on CX2

If it is cheap, I'd get one!

Hope this helps

JJ