As usual, the more I read the more I get confused. How does the OM 28/2.8 and 24/2.8 compares? While they don't sport CRC like the Nikon the smaller size and weight does appeal to me.
Cableaddict wrote:
One warning: They vary a LOT. You simply MUST buy a few, and sell-off the weak ones. -And of course make sure it's an AI-s, not an Ai.
Hmm, that is not entirely correct. AI (auto indexing) lenses are fine to use on modern Nikon cameras, I have one of those, a 28mm f/2.0 AI and it works splendidly. Pre-AI or non-AI lenses (prior to 1977) are the ones to avoid as that can damage your camera. Both AI and AI-S mount lenses shouldn't pose any problems.
TWoK wrote:
The 28/2 AI is very similar to the 28/2 AIS; however, it only focuses to .3 instead of .25 like the AIS. I prefer the 24/2 AIS.
KEH lately fucking sucks, to put it bluntly.
I have found that there EX rated lenses have really gone up but there BGN lenses are still good deals. I used to consider both, but anymore I am only considering the BGN lenses. When I have gotten these in the past they have been in very nice shape so I still will consider them.
AGeoJO wrote:
Hmm, that is not entirely correct. AI (auto indexing) lenses are fine to use on modern Nikon cameras, I have one of those, a 28mm f/2.0 AI and it works splendidly. Pre-AI or non-AI lenses (prior to 1977) are the ones to avoid as that can damage your camera. Both AI and AI-S mount lenses shouldn't pose any problems.
He probably meant that the 28/2.8 AIS is very different from the 28/2.8 AI, and that the AIS is the one to get for best IQ.
I was under the impression that you were referring to Nikkor AI lenses in general and not to the specific case of the 28mm. But you are right about that since the OP was inquiring about 28mm. Yes, get the one with the minimum focusig distance of 0.2m, which in that case comes in AI-S mount . Two sample shots with it: http://www.pbase.com/ageojo/image/106918436.jpg
Steve Spencer wrote:
I have found that there EX rated lenses have really gone up but there BGN lenses are still good deals. I used to consider both, but anymore I am only considering the BGN lenses. When I have gotten these in the past they have been in very nice shape so I still will consider them.
In the past KEH BGN was reasonable. It no longer is. I had some old BGN lenses which were great. Everything that was BGN on my last 3 orders was trash and got returned. Before that my BGN Nikkor fish was garbage and I should have returned it too. They are not the KEH of old. They have changed.
Aug 15, 2009 at 08:42 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
I mean, be my guest to try, but over the last year I have really seen their quality drop. They still take returns have have good customer service, but in the past there was no need to return everything because it was always better than expected. All of the recent BGN things I've purchased would be better described as ugly.
These "macro studies" were made with my 2.8/28mm AI-S Nikkor manual focus wide angle lens. All of them wide open af f/2.8.
Sometimes you have to make yourself some obstacles
All the above with Nikon D300 • Nikkor AI-S 2.8/28mm • at f/2.8 ISO 200 • all heavily cropped
trumpet_guy wrote:
Cableaddict is referring to this set of test images on my pbase site: http://www.pbase.com/tswen/nk28cz28
Be sure to view the original (100%) files.
Tim, I'm grateful to you for sharing your test, but I haven't found it very illuminating. I started with the f2.8 shot. The building shows far more crisp detail on the Zeiss. They are both shoddy towards the corners, and greatly inferior to the Leica in that regard. Perhaps the Nikkor holds detail a little farther out towards the edge. All of this can be found at http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/28mm_3.html .
Your test is done on a 5D, apparently, so the tests have not been focussed with Liveview, and it's hard to say if the two shots are focussed to the same distance. If you're discussing adaptor thickness affecting your infinite focus, then you don't have a reliable way of focussing on your subject, and it's hard to say what the tests show. Also the Nikon shots are brighter, and that can dramatically affect colour rendition.
I don't see anything in your test that isn't at least as reliably shown at the 16-9.net page. The crispy micro-contrast of the Zeiss is one of the reasons people love it. As Mark says, You can always add more sharpening to catch up though, but surely it's better to get the detail without sharpening.
I would be interested to see these two lenses tested on 5D2 or 1Ds3 with Liveview focussing. I think the superb sharpness of the Zeiss might open up clear water between these two lenses at higher resolutions.
I sold mine to a fellow FMer. I wanted faster. For the $250 or so that I sold it for (plus it was mint), I do regret it now. It had a nice characteristic about it and was very sharp. I would buy again in the future. The CRC makes for some great close up work too.
Your points are valid, and I do think it would be best to test on a higher-resolution body with LiveView.
My test was mostly for my own benefit, since I have both lenses and hope to sell one. Just trying to
figure out which.
The 16-9 test doesn't concentrate on infinity focus shots, so I posted these. If I get time, I'll do a better
test someday.
Regards,
Tim
OK. I re-posted some comparison pics at http://www.pbase.com/tswen/nk28cz28
and this time tried to match brightness a bit better.
A 5DII test with live view would have been better, but
I don't have that high-res camera body.
I bought an AIS 28 2.8 according to trumpet_guy's and 16-9.net's tests. But in the test, the AIS 28 2.8 was focused at a closer distance than the CZ. It's obvious in the comparison of F2.8 as the grass near the camera showed the difference. So the infinity performance of the AIS probably wasn't at its best.
I kept failing to find a decent AI-EOS adapter for my AIS 28 and 450D. It's very frustrating. Finally I sold my camera body!
Although mine was on a bad match, the AIS still showed extremely high sharpness in center of the pic on the high pixel desity 450D, using LV to focus. But the sides of the pic was blurred due to axis deviation caused by adaptor or camera body.
I will buy a 5DII this week and hopefully it will marry up with my cheap adapter and AIS. If it does, I will conduct a test using LV
How does the OM 28/2.8 and 24/2.8 compares? While they don't sport CRC like the Nikon the smaller size and weight does appeal to me.
