Nikkor 15mm f/3.5 opinions?

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

I had a Samyang, I didn't really like it. Recently gained appreication for older film era Nikkors.
Wondering if the 15mm f/3.5 would be a better option compared to something like the irix 15 f/2.4s. cost about the same.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

It has very low geometric distortion at middle to remote distance, some barrel distortion (likely caused by the CRC) at close range. There is a high propensity for ghosts and flare if you shoot into strong light sources, so keep an eye for where these issues distribute themselves inside the frame. Sometimes just moving the camera a little or using your hand or other available light shields can help a lot.

Sharpness is good if you nail the focus. There will be some CA on DSLRs but the issue can be tempered by many RAW converters.

Don't forget the rear filter as you lose infinity focus without any filter inserted. Some 15 mm Nikkors seen by me for sale had no filter accompanying them and the seller had "no idea" where the filter(s) had gone. The hood for the old and new 15 mm Nikkors can be interchanged.

Workmanship is first class and used with care the lens will last a life time. Just don't bump it and be careful with that huge bulbous front element. A clean front is essential but scrubbing the glass can introduce scratches.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

Thank you so much. you are the man. Didn't see this in the legacy pages for super wide angles.
How'd you suppose it'd compare to the Samyang or irix or other modern glass?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Modern lenses are "modern" in every sense of the phrase. Thus probably better, measurewise. In the field? no idea.

I like the older lenses and have no issues with what they deliver. The 15/3.5 handles very well on my Nikon Df.

[Fons Baerken]

I have tried 2 different copies one belonged to a friend slightly better than the one i have; its like a fisheye without the distortion, flare can be an issue.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

lack of distortion is pretty impressive.

[chris dees]

I have the AIS version.
Great lens and as already stated; quite prone to flare.

[Macro_Cosmos]

It's a great lens, but bear in mind of the shortcomings:
1. Very expensive! It's deemed as a collector's item nowadays.
2. Without the rear filter, it cannot focus to infinity. Basically the rear filter is a part of the lens' optical formula.
3. Can't used filters such as ND and CPL. I'm sure people who are geeky enough can just design and 3D print a filter holder

I'd personally just get a 15-30 Tamron, 14-24 Nikon, 12-24 Sigma, or 12mm D-Dreamer Laowa. The new 14/2.4 Samyang XP is still not available for F mount 

[longzoom]

14-24 Nikkor  flares even worse. Tam 15-30 is better, and second version of Sig 12-24, almost, has no distortions. Do not know about last F4.0 incarnation of this lens. My former 15/3.5 Nikkor had very bad blue cast, but 14/2.8 AF was illustrious. Yeah, sample variation, we have to take it into our accounts... LZ