Nikkor 28mm f/2 ai and ai-s

[Tristin]

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.

[Akira]

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.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

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]

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.

[Airy]

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.

[Fons Baerken]

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.

[Nick Scavone]

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).

[Akira]

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.

[Tristin]

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! ☺

[John Geerts]

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 )

[Roland Vink]

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:

SIC:


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]

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.

[Tristin]

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?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

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.

[Airy]

Frederik Rasmussen also reports a slight optical advantage to the AI version on his web page : http://www.momentcorp.com/review/index.html
But here too, no evidence is shown.