Author Topic: Difference between Nikkor AF-D 28mm f/1.4 and Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f/2 on D810  (Read 19436 times)

longzoom

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 769
  • You ARE NikonGear
Excuse me, Have I done something wrong in the forum?....., in the messages?
  Nothin wrong from your side. It is concerning myself only! THX! LZ

Jedi

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • Let the light be with you!
  Nothin wrong from your side. It is concerning myself only! THX! LZ
ok!
Nikon D810 - Zeiss 21/2.8, Zeiss 25/2, Zeiss 28/2, Nikon 28mm f/2 AI, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss M-P 50/2, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4,  Zeiss M-P 100/2, Nikon 105/2.5 AI, Nikon AF-D 105/2 DC, Zeiss 135/2, Nikon AF-D 135/2 DC, Nikon AF 200/4 Micro Nikkor.

Jedi

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • Let the light be with you!
It is extremely difficult to make a lens change from wide angle to tele and maintain high image quality.


It's true.
Nikon D810 - Zeiss 21/2.8, Zeiss 25/2, Zeiss 28/2, Nikon 28mm f/2 AI, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss M-P 50/2, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4,  Zeiss M-P 100/2, Nikon 105/2.5 AI, Nikon AF-D 105/2 DC, Zeiss 135/2, Nikon AF-D 135/2 DC, Nikon AF 200/4 Micro Nikkor.

Jedi

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • Let the light be with you!
 To Ilkka Nissilä:  you said: "I do think the 24/1.4 is very robust."
[/quote]

Ok, it's your opinion...., I respect it and I enrich with it.

What about the feeling the touch when you shoot, have you ever tried mf lens off past years?

What about low light conditions and environmental portraits of Nikon 28/1.4D and Zeiss Distagon 28/2?

Nikon D810 - Zeiss 21/2.8, Zeiss 25/2, Zeiss 28/2, Nikon 28mm f/2 AI, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss M-P 50/2, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4,  Zeiss M-P 100/2, Nikon 105/2.5 AI, Nikon AF-D 105/2 DC, Zeiss 135/2, Nikon AF-D 135/2 DC, Nikon AF 200/4 Micro Nikkor.

Bjørn Rørslett

  • Fierce Bear of the North
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 8252
  • Oslo, Norway
1) Have you used them for 20-25 years, at least, yet?


These lenses will outlive me for sure.

Quote
2) Strong polycarbonate, yes, but plastic, anyway! Don't you ever think that a professional or amateur user, deserve something better? (I repeat)

This is a basic misunderstanding of materials. For most designs, polycarbonate shells are the equal or better approach. Try shooting in very cold weather to learn the importance of material choice.

Quote
3) They are excellnt optics, ok, but the palstic don't ensure cunstance like the metal for a long time, I repeat.

Feel free to have this opinion., I don't share it. You should not overlook the presence of metal inside the casing.

Quote
...4) Great optical design, certainly!!
5) My old 24-70mm f/2.8 (my first 24-70mm, not VRII) crashed in mountain and it separated into two definite parts for a little fall; in the past also my old AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 "double ring" (second version of the 80-200mm f/2.8, not the pump, not the AF-S) crashed, on a rock on the terrain and remained unhurt: you know that it's obvious....., plastic vs metal!!! 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D, 85/1.4D, 105/2D DC, 135 f/2D DC, 28/1.4D, 300mm AF f/4 were thank and not lenses for digital cameras, but they were another thing. Nikon has choosen this street and I have choosen Zeiss.


All lenses will break if too much impact is encountered. Trust me, I have been present at too many such occasions than I care to remember. The question is more whether or not it can be fixed later. The typical PJ-style lenses such as 24-70 are *designed* to break when too much force is encountered, this is in order to protect the lens optics, and the camera/mirror box. There is a metal alloy section to the rear that will deform and break away under such impacts. This allows the Nikon techs to rebuild the lens to specification within 10-15 minutes, say during the recession between two halves of a football match. I've have seen the procedure live. Camera survived unharmed.

Quote
...
But, master, what do you think about Nikon 28/1.4D vs Zeiss Distagon T* 28/2 in low lights conditions for color rendering?

Thank you, master!

My thoughts on the 28/1.4 are already posted and don't need to be repeated. As I stated before, I haven't used this particular Zeiss lens and thus hold no preset opinion of it.

MILLIREHM

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Vienna, Austria
If mechanical robustness is the main issue then the AF-D 28 mm f/1.4 should be excluded as it shares the unreliable plastic M-A ring - so another option is needed
Wolfgang Rehm

Jedi

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • Let the light be with you!
These lenses will outlive me for sure.

This is a basic misunderstanding of materials. For most designs, polycarbonate shells are the equal or better approach. Try shooting in very cold weather to learn the importance of material choice.

Feel free to have this opinion., I don't share it. You should not overlook the presence of metal inside the casing.

All lenses will break if too much impact is encountered. Trust me, I have been present at too many such occasions than I care to remember. The question is more whether or not it can be fixed later. The typical PJ-style lenses such as 24-70 are *designed* to break when too much force is encountered, this is in order to protect the lens optics, and the camera/mirror box. There is a metal alloy section to the rear that will deform and break away under such impacts. This allows the Nikon techs to rebuild the lens to specification within 10-15 minutes, say during the recession between two halves of a football match. I've have seen the procedure live. Camera survived unharmed.

My thoughts on the 28/1.4 are already posted and don't need to be repeated. As I stated before, I haven't used this particular Zeiss lens and thus hold no preset opinion of it.

Excuse me, i didn't remember your answer about comparison between Nikon 28/1.4D and Zeiss: it's true, you have answered, yet, excuse me.
Thank you for your opinion about points 1), 2), 3), 4), 5).
Nikon D810 - Zeiss 21/2.8, Zeiss 25/2, Zeiss 28/2, Nikon 28mm f/2 AI, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss M-P 50/2, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4,  Zeiss M-P 100/2, Nikon 105/2.5 AI, Nikon AF-D 105/2 DC, Zeiss 135/2, Nikon AF-D 135/2 DC, Nikon AF 200/4 Micro Nikkor.

chambeshi

  • Guest
Hi Jedi

some Zeiss ultrawide photos were posted in this Lens section - but only 21mm and 15mm i think, including sunset conditions. Some flare issues in direct sun, but fine on post sunset dusk skies. Posted earlier this month or December. I cannot say about comparisons of Zeiss 28 2.8 vs Nikon 28 1.4, without searching NG. Also those external links posted above include photos and more, and they represent months of photography and comparisons. As on NG all kindly shared

I strongly prefer the plastic and rubber on the outer surface of lenses and cameras as they do not feel cold to touch in very cold (-15C to -35C) temperatures as metal does. Also I have experienced a Zeiss lens' manual focus to jam and break in the cold in conditions where Nikkors perform flawlessly. I think too tight tolerances and lack of sufficient outdoor testing are responsible.

... Try shooting in very cold weather to learn the importance of material choice.

Being a luddite in the tropics  ;) This has never even occurred to me.
All lenses will break if too much impact is encountered. Trust me, I have been present at too many such occasions than I care to remember. The question is more whether or not it can be fixed later. The typical PJ-style lenses such as 24-70 are *designed* to break when too much force is encountered, this is in order to protect the lens optics, and the camera/mirror box. There is a metal alloy section to the rear that will deform and break away under such impacts. This allows the Nikon techs to rebuild the lens to specification within 10-15 minutes, say during the recession between two halves of a football match. I've have seen the procedure live. Camera survived unharmed.

One Fascinating salvage story !

On the subject of MF Nikkors and Zeiss being metal is to be brutally honest lies, the attraction also lies in the strong aesthetic aspect! Thus some fly fisherman still use bamboo split cane rods, yet graphite is better. But i will never own a plastic rifle - walnut retains unmatchable old world values even though modern synthetic ploymers are stronger (look at modern military specs). While I miss my FM2 and still keep my F3 (bought as a student with an inheritance) I should mention (off topic from Twenty Eights) that the 18-55 on an old DX was ideal for geological fieldwork where I often carried a 15 lb sledge hammer etc. Somehow I never dropped this outfit. Yet my 300 2.8G VR2 fell off the monopod earlier this month and is absolutely fine but likely it was buffered by the neoprene camou cover, and the robust rubberized hood (whose virtues  Bjorn has endorsed as superior to that fitted to the 200 f2). Still 2.9 kg lands hard from 5+ft. Major damage to the D500 attests to this!
I upgraded from DX for super optics, better prime ultra wides and proper flash for closeups + optimal sensors on DSLRs and again I concur the Df, D810 and D500 meet my complementary requirements. Polycarbonate is here to stay.
On the AFD arena I switch my MF AF especially carefully on my 70-180 Micro-Nikkor, after Bjorn told us last year his had broken! I only keep the AF option where I shoot over longer distances.

On a more general note to Everyone, true to the essence of NG forum, the above quotes exemplify just a couple of many interesting points shared - Important and most Fascinating Lesson in fact. A remarkable strength of NG lis grounded in the diversity of conditions under which we all Do photography. And it's global spanning the supercontinents. I won't mention how many centuries of accumulated experience if summed  ;) ;)
This is just great. It is to be respected and maintained. Above all, a wealth of unique wisdom to be learnt from that enriches many lives. I continue to learn how little I know!

As they say in Mozambique, Aluta Continua! May we continue learn more of the diversity of new and classic gear  ;)

kind regards

Woody

Jedi

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • Let the light be with you!
If mechanical robustness is the main issue then the AF-D 28 mm f/1.4 should be excluded as it shares the unreliable plastic M-A ring - so another option is needed

The subject of the topic is between Nikon AF-D 28mm f/1.4 and Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f/2, which is all-metal: the words about the plastic are an off-topic discussion. If you read the topic from the beginning and its title you undestrand it. I would have no doubts if the comparison was between a "plast" lens and the Nikon 28/1.4D, but, I repeat, the comparison is:

Nikon AF 28mm f/1.4D  vs  ZEISS DISTAGON T* 28mm f/2 ,  about color rendering in low light conditions, for landscapes and environmental portrait.

Nikon D810 - Zeiss 21/2.8, Zeiss 25/2, Zeiss 28/2, Nikon 28mm f/2 AI, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss M-P 50/2, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4,  Zeiss M-P 100/2, Nikon 105/2.5 AI, Nikon AF-D 105/2 DC, Zeiss 135/2, Nikon AF-D 135/2 DC, Nikon AF 200/4 Micro Nikkor.

Jedi

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • Let the light be with you!

Being a luddite in the tropics  ;) This has never even occurred to me.
One Fascinating salvage story !



The plastic melts at 50°!!!
Nikon D810 - Zeiss 21/2.8, Zeiss 25/2, Zeiss 28/2, Nikon 28mm f/2 AI, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss M-P 50/2, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4,  Zeiss M-P 100/2, Nikon 105/2.5 AI, Nikon AF-D 105/2 DC, Zeiss 135/2, Nikon AF-D 135/2 DC, Nikon AF 200/4 Micro Nikkor.

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6529
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
As an engineer it is quite obvious that Nikon choose materials for a lens from many years of experience.


If you bump an aluminum lens hard it will get a permanent deformation and or break.
At will be rendered useless,,,


If you do it to polycarbonate it springs back into the original shape or break.
Often the lens will still work until you can get it repaired,,,


From an engineering point of view and for tough professional use the outside polycarbonate with internal housing of the optics in a cast aluminum or magnesium design is optimal.


Repairing and working on lenses for many years it is quite apparent that the current 1.4 AFS lenses and the fixed FL longer lenses, will be very sturdy over time due to no extension of the outer lens housing, the 2.8 AFS Zooms are more fragile due to the extension of the lens tubes and the relative weak design of the internal zoom guides, here you need to always use the lens hood as protection.


Actually looking at lens hoods gives you an idea of how strong polycarbonate is, old aluminum lens hoods are bent out of shape extremely easily,,,, The polycarbonate lens hoods stay in their shape or break at the mount,,,


On a general note:


Please feel free to enjoy old and new MF lenses most us here have our shelves full of them,,,


The same goes for the plastic lenses,,,


However stating one is better than the other is plain wrong!


The 28mm 1.4 AF-D is a nice lens for environmental portraits and reportage PJ style shooting, not for nature scenes as a general lens - sold mine years ago, the new series of 1.4 is vastly superior.


Seems to me your focusing way too much about focal length! Instead focus on lens signature!


If you want the best and strongest all round Manual Focus lenses you should switch to or add a Leica M camera to the kit an buy their Lenses!


They make 21mm 24mm 28mm 35mm 50mm 1.4 lenses that you seem to like,,,

The Leica 35mm 1.4 ASPH FLE is the only one I currently own,,, and it is a engineering photography marvel!!! All hand build! Very similar performance to Nikkor 1.4 series but a little better image quality, yes they also cost three times as much,,

They also make slower lenses like their 24mm I have, no distortion and sharp wide open at 3.8 over the entire frame! These lenses you don't need to stop down unless you like more depth of field! They take photography to an whole other level! Especially for us who love photography as a profession and a hobby.

The Leica M 50mm APO 2.0 is even better than the Otus 55mm!

Leica M lenses are build to another philosophy, they are build to be compact / portable and outstanding.
 
Erik Lund

Jedi

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 152
  • Let the light be with you!
Thank you, Erik Lund, finally one user that knows Nikon 28mm f/1.4D!!! I agree about the Leica's system superiority, but i have no money to buy products of Leica brand! I couldn't sell my Nikon lenses to buy Leica lenses, I love them!!!
Nikon D810 - Zeiss 21/2.8, Zeiss 25/2, Zeiss 28/2, Nikon 28mm f/2 AI, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss M-P 50/2, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4,  Zeiss M-P 100/2, Nikon 105/2.5 AI, Nikon AF-D 105/2 DC, Zeiss 135/2, Nikon AF-D 135/2 DC, Nikon AF 200/4 Micro Nikkor.

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6529
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
The color difference between Nikkor and Zeiss is a complete non issue in these digital recordings, the software conversion of the RAW file is what you should look into re this, there are many alternatives for conversion programs with vast different look and feel with a click of a button,,,
Erik Lund

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 6529
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
The plastic melts at 50°!!!

He he funny  :o

Actual fact is well above 100° C - and by then you will find me in the bar with a cold drink,,,

On a serious note I have been shooting at our steel melting furnace, when it was still in service, poring of the molten steel metal into molds - Up close, all dressed in thick leather I had to have the camera in front of my face - or the heat would be unbearable,,, So yes 28-70mm AFS 2.8 is approved for working in the heat literally! The lens hood survived!
Erik Lund

MILLIREHM

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Vienna, Austria
The subject of the topic is between Nikon AF-D 28mm f/1.4 and Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f/2, which is all-metal: the words about the plastic are an off-topic discussion. If you read the topic from the beginning and its title you undestrand it. I would have no doubts if the comparison was between a "plast" lens and the Nikon 28/1.4D, but, I repeat, the comparison is:

Nikon AF 28mm f/1.4D  vs  ZEISS DISTAGON T* 28mm f/2 ,  about color rendering in low light conditions, for landscapes and environmental portrait.

you for yourself wrote that you want a solid lens and (as you could read)  i just was telling you that the 28/1,4 as one of the lenses of your choice has got a plast issue, so in case there is off-topic you started it.

and Jedi if you carefully review your general writing and replying style here in this thread you might get the idea of considering whether it is both respectful and polite
Wolfgang Rehm