newyork wrote:
Idk if Fotodiox is any good but both adapters are $100 total.
You could do a dumb F-M, but you'd need a smart M-Z like the TTA 6-bit. Something that spoofs an autofocus lens being attached. I don't know if TTA is still making it (says sold out), but it says $90 on the site. An F-M dumb adapter would be like, $25.
Having done this, I don't know that it's worth the effort. A lot of lenses vignette hard with an F-M adapter, and the TTA specifically isn't the most robust thing in the world. It's nice when it works, but a lot of the time it's honestly kind of a faff.
Wow that Viltrox 14 looks really, really nice. Might have to break down and order that as my ultra wide for a while until money starts growing on trees and I can grab a 14-24.
Wow!!!! I think I have a goal for cheaper pick ups now. 28 and 105 and ftz ii. Add in a 35 1.2 Viltrox and a 70-200 or fast S prime and I’m tapped for the year
To be clear, is that 28, f/2 or f/2.8
lirain wrote:
Then I suggest getting the 28/f2 AIS...
newyork wrote:
Wow!!!! I think I have a goal for cheaper pick ups now. 28 and 105 and ftz ii. Add in a 35 1.2 Viltrox and a 70-200 or fast S prime and I’m tapped for the year
To be clear, is that 28, f/2 or f/2.8
Mine is the 28 f/2, It is a tiny bit longer than the 28 f/2.8 and a bit harder to find (at least here). Common believe is, that the f/2.8 is the sharper lens, but I'm not sure - I have nothing to complain about my f/2 and it is easily my most used manual Nikkor.
lirain wrote:
Mine is the 28 f/2, It is a tiny bit longer than the 28 f/2.8 and a bit harder to find (at least here). Common believe is, that the f/2.8 is the sharper lens, but I'm not sure - I have nothing to complain about my f/2 and it is easily my most used manual Nikkor.
I am a big fan of the Nikkor "fast" wide-angles, and indeed "F2 makes me happy". After considerable soul- (and wallet-) searching, I upgraded my AI'ed Nikkor 24/2.8 N.C. with a brand new AiS 24/2 (to this day, the only Nikkor I didn't buy used). This was in the 80's so pre-Internet, and I perused all the lens reviews I could find in magazines like Modern Photography before pulling the trigger on the purchase. As I shot a lot of street- and night-photography with the 24/2.8, I hoped that the additional stop would afford me more options in low-light. The 24/2 is barely larger/heavier than the f/2.8 lens, but what I didn't know was that the f/2 lens is a bit squirrelly in its rendering, especially wide-open. I was not then a 28mm shooter (the 24mm focal length made up 80% of my photos), but the same dilemma pertains to the Nikkor 28mm lens. With the 28mm, the f/2 is actually noticeably larger/heavier than the f/2.8, and the close focus is 0.3m vs 0.2m for the f/2.8, so arguably the 28/2.8 is the superiour lens.
I have come to accept the quirks of my 24/2 wide-open (swirly bokeh, poor corners), and though I have an AF-D 24/2.8, still shoot the f/2 regularly. I'd say if you find a 28/2 in good condition at a good price, it will be a great lens, but you'd probably get a 28/2.8 for less and its a better lens all-round (and with today's digital sensors, a single stop is not so important)
grantgoodes wrote:
I am a big fan of the Nikkor "fast" wide-angles, and indeed "F2 makes me happy". After considerable soul- (and wallet-) searching, I upgraded my AI'ed Nikkor 24/2.8 N.C. with a brand new AiS 24/2 (to this day, the only Nikkor I didn't buy used). This was in the 80's so pre-Internet, and I perused all the lens reviews I could find in magazines like Modern Photography before pulling the trigger on the purchase. As I shot a lot of street- and night-photography with the 24/2.8, I hoped that the additional stop would afford me more options in low-light. The 24/2 is barely larger/heavier than the f/2.8 lens, but what I didn't know was that the f/2 lens is a bit squirrelly in its rendering, especially wide-open. I was not then a 28mm shooter (the 24mm focal length made up 80% of my photos), but the same dilemma pertains to the Nikkor 28mm lens. With the 28mm, the f/2 is actually noticeably larger/heavier than the f/2.8, and the close focus is 0.3m vs 0.2m for the f/2.8, so arguably the 28/2.8 is the superiour lens.
I have come to accept the quirks of my 24/2 wide-open (swirly bokeh, poor corners), and though I have an AF-D 24/2.8, still shoot the f/2 regularly. I'd say if you find a 28/2 in good condition at a good price, it will be a great lens, but you'd probably get a 28/2.8 for less and its a better lens all-round (and with today's digital sensors, a single stop is not so important) ...Show more →
I've had my eye out for both a 28 f2.8 AIS and a 105 f2.5 for more than 3 months and just haven't been able to find either one in decent shape. My suspicion is that the excellent manual UI of the newer Z bodies has made them scarce.
A couple years ago I did snag a 180 f2.8 ED IF in like-new condition. Built like a tank with wonderful sharpness and smooth bokeh, the only thing I find problematic is closest focus which is about 1.5m.
newyork wrote:
Wow!!!! I think I have a goal for cheaper pick ups now. 28 and 105 and ftz ii.
Two things to note:
1. Unless you want to get a so-called dandelion chip, the FTZ II isn't necessary; any dumb adapter will do (caveat emptor: many of those are not as precisely machined so may focus past infinity)
2. Make sure you join everyone over at the Manual Focus Nikon Glass thread once you get these!
It was one of my first purchases of manual Nikkor lenses because it has such a stellar reputation. And it is a solid lens.. but I don’t love it. I think it was a great lens at the time but now it’s just okay and imo the rendering is not that special (also hard to do on a 28mm f2.8)..
It is nice how close you can focus with it.
..But the Voigtländer 28mm f2.8 in its latest iteration is similar in that regard and I feel is overall similar in performance yet smaller and lighter. Depending on the price I’d go for the Voigtländer if I didn’t already own the Nikkor.
Not on eBay? I see them there listed as mint or excellent
glassartist wrote:
I've had my eye out for both a 28 f2.8 AIS and a 105 f2.5 for more than 3 months and just haven't been able to find either one in decent shape. My suspicion is that the excellent manual UI of the newer Z bodies has made them scarce.
A couple years ago I did snag a 180 f2.8 ED IF in like-new condition. Built like a tank with wonderful sharpness and smooth bokeh, the only thing I find problematic is closest focus which is about 1.5m.
I’d probably get the ftz ii as one day I’d be interested in the f mount 105 1.4 or 58 1.4.
mivadep wrote:
Two things to note:
1. Unless you want to get a so-called dandelion chip, the FTZ II isn't necessary; any dumb adapter will do (caveat emptor: many of those are not as precisely machined so may focus past infinity)
2. Make sure you join everyone over at the Manual Focus Nikon Glass thread once you get these!
