How good is this lens really? Some people describe the performance as legendary - Is that true or is it more of a hype since it commands such a high price now after it has been discontinued? How does it stack up to the slightly slower brother, the f/2.0? To owners of this lens, would you please post images taken with that lens?
I'd say it's quite foolish to spend 3+ grand on such a lens when Nikon sooner or later will relase a 2x/35 1.4. When they do, price on 28/1.4 will go down a lot ... But it is one of a kind, so if you're willing to take the financial risk why not?
This is an interesting read about the development of that lens, that may give some context to its legendary status. Apparently, the technical hurdles that had to be overcome to build that lens were unprecedented, and the price reflects the immense amount of effort and difficulty it took to develop and produce.
I don't think it's likely that we're going to see a dramatically cheaper alternative soon. Not at the same IQ anyway.
Apparently, a lot of effort went into eliminating sagital coma flare- and the lens is special for the same reasons that the 58 f1.2 NOCT is special above and beyond its 55 f1.2 younger brother.
Personally, I'd be really happy with a cheaper smaller version that exhibits coma flare, it that's what it takes to get the cost down. I can't imagine a lens I'd want more right now than a 24 f1.4, or a 24 f1.8 if it was cheap.
AGeoJO wrote:
How good is this lens really? Some people describe the performance as legendary - Is that true or is it more of a hype since it commands such a high price now after it has been discontinued? How does it stack up to the slightly slower brother, the f/2.0? To owners of this lens, would you please post images taken with that lens?
Thanks,
Joshua
Joshua!
I guess it depends on what you define as "good" in this case. It's (my copy that is) is not as sharp as the 24-70 for instance, but on the other hand it has a marvelous bokeh and of couse is a fair bit faster than the 2.8 of the 24-70. It is also a lot smaller and lighter.
If you need the AF, there is only a 2.8 alternative (the 28/2.8 D). But I've heard it's not a very good lens. The 24/28 D is supposedly a lot better than the 28/28 D.
I would definately try it out before forking out the $ 3000 + it costs today. That said, I've tried to part with it twice - but just couldn't in the end....
At least the price is legendary
I can buy one overhere for € 3499,00 and that one did already came down € 500,00
I would like Nikon to produce good fast wideangles but not at that price.
You can buy lots of amazing glass with this amount of money. I would go for the manual 28mm f2.8 but thats just me. I know its 2 stops slower but do you really need the extra stops when high iso performance is so good these days?
Avi, Jonas, Erik, Sputnik (), Chris and dmitris,
Thank you for your input. I also discuseed the merit of this lens with Francisco and he believed that it is not worth the entry fee. Personally, I wouldn't buy it outright, a few was offered here on FM without any bites. But I am considering a trade of my other gear for this particular lens. My exposure to Nikon gear has been fairly short (since June with a D700) although since then I have spent a fair amount of time doing research, going over reviews and tidbits what I could gather on Nikon lenses. That's the benefit I got for being semi-retired, I guess . In general, some people think that it is extra-ordinary, some more luke-warm. It is definitely a good lens but whether it is worth the money is a different story.
Sputnik, there are some really interesting shots in your flickr there. I like the fact that there is a compilation of images shot with that lens from various people. Thank you.
Again, I appreciate all the input sofar and still welcome more tp come.
Well, if it was a trade in deal, I would more likely go for it, but for the cash asked these days...it's just insane. I love the lens though, but I get emotional sometimes
epuja wrote:
Sounds like for less than the price of the 24mm Nikon u can get a 24L, 35L, and a spare 5d body
Yep. I should have said "you could buy a lens and a camera body". So yeah, the price is pretty ridiculous. Of course I would buy it if I had the money, but it's still crazy.
Avi B wrote:
I'd rather you try the AIS 35 f/1.4 instead.
Which is also overhyped. I just sold mine. It is among the sharpest lenses ever @ f/4, but not so at larger apertures. The main reason for selling it, was that it draws in an ugly way. Might seem odd, but not only the bokeh is ugly at wide apertures. The sharpness is also "busy" in the way it declines on axis.
Contrast is quite high and flare is well under control. But this lens is really demanding if you want nice IQ. It was a nice companion, but not a mate for life. Especially not when you have compared it to the 24-70 and 28/2.8 AIS.
"Drawing" might seem like a ridiculous term that can't be verified by numbers. And that is why I really can't explain why I didn't like it as much as I wanted to.
If you've got the chance, try it! It's a legend. But definitely not a miracle.
