Well, I'm not sure what to make of your post. That's a beautifully rendered flower! I haven't figured out how to access the EXIF data on these posted photos, so I don't know what f-stop you used. I looks like a fairly shallow depth of field, and the corners are out of the focal plane - so wouldn't they be soft? Can't the vignetting be adjusted in PP? I see LR has a lens profile included for the 24 f2.8. Granted it was film and not the hi-res 850 sensor, but wasn't the 24 f2.8 one of Galen Rowell's favorite landscape lenses? But I hear what you are saying - hi tech for its day, but very dated for now.
Thanks
Doug
HCE HCE wrote:
Doug I think both of those 24mm lenses are pretty lame with soft corners and vignetting!
D850 28mm f/2.8 AI-S
Doug, do not listen to these pixel peeper guys. The real fact is that both 28 have a nice character. I do prefer f/2 incarnation because I am a low light sucker but the f/2.8 is darn good too! It's much fun using them.
Actually he was saying the 24s were lame and posted a photo with the 28 - which was quite nice. I thought the photo was also a 24 - I need to learn to read better on these small laptops
so please disregard the post above
Doug
graytrekker wrote:
Actually he was saying the 24s were lame and posted a photo with the 28 - which was quite nice. I thought the photo was also a 24 - I need to learn to read better on these small laptops
so please disregard the post above
Doug
Doug,
I have a 24/2.8 NC - I like it and use it a lot. Somebody's work on this board put me onto it a couple of years ago. (Can't remember who) Prior to the 24 I had purchased a 28/2.8 AI-S. Love that lens too but was not impressed by its performance at infinity for landscapes. Hence the 24 came to pass.
I don't pixel peep or have super exotic glass to compare the 24 against. I shoot a lot of panos with this lens and it always seems to make it into my camera bag since it works wonderfully on my infrared DX camera too.
With the HN-1 hood mounted on top of a 52mm protection filter then is does vignette a bit at large apertures on FX. This has never bothered me. My only criticism is that you do need to watch out for flare.
I have plenty of 24/2.8 NC pics on my Flickr. Not all are tagged properly but if you search my stream with 24 then plenty will be filtered out.
graytrekker wrote:
Hello - this is my first post - ver 2. By that I mean I first posted it on the general Nikon board and it was suggested I re-post here.
I have some older Nikkors from the 70s when I had a Nikkormat. They have been on the shelf for a very long time until I recently got a Df. I really enjoy using these on this camera and would like to add a few more MF lenses to my collection. Specifically, I was looking at a 28mm. I am trying to decide between the f2 and the 2.8. Bjorn Rorslett has the opinion than the 2.8 is sharper for close up, but the 2 is better at infinity. I have read some reviews/comparisons that I have found on various sites - but all of them quite old. There seems little consensus and it may be due to sample variation. My use would be mainly (but not solely) landscape where infinity focus and corner sharpness is important to me.
My question is threefold, as I do rather enjoy the non-AI lenses with the scalloped metal focus ring:
1) Sticking with the pre-AI, pre-K, but still wanting some multi-coating, is there a significant performance difference between the NC Auto variants of the f2 and f2.8?
2) Do you find this same difference (if there is one) in the AI/AIS versions?
3) Is there a significant performance difference between the NC Auto and the AI/AIS versions? [is newer always better?]
Thank you ahead of time for your considered opinions/knowledge!
Welcome! I'll throw in my 2 cents for whatever that's worth. I bought George's 28mm 2.8 AIS from him because I had sold mine a long time ago and really missed it. Plus, George gave me a deal I couldn't refuse.
My main reasons I like this lens are these:
1) I like the FL I get using my cropped Fuji X-T2.
2) It's very sharp with good contrast.
3) Last, but not least, it focuses extremely close and I love the wide angle close up shots for the perspective.
Venky, there's some of the real early Nikkors (1959-1960 manufacture) whose rear lip on the mount is too wide to even go onto the Df, unless the aperture ring has been modified. For me those only fit on the Nikon F or F2 cameras.
saph wrote:
graytrekker and beardedspoon, welcome!
Venky, there's some of the real early Nikkors (1959-1960 manufacture) whose rear lip on the mount is too wide to even go onto the Df, unless the aperture ring has been modified. For me those only fit on the Nikon F or F2 cameras.
I remember reading about the aperture ring skirts somewhere but can’t find it this morning. My serial number takes mine back to those years. Mine may have been modified from a previous owner. I bought to on eBay a few years ago. If it is modified they did a “factory” job on it. 😀
gbohannon wrote:
I remember reading about the aperture ring skirts somewhere but can’t find it this morning. My serial number takes mine back to those years. Mine may have been modified from a previous owner. I bought to on eBay a few years ago. If it is modified they did a “factory” job on it. 😀
Samy and Venkat. Check out the lens photos from these 1959 Tick Mark lenses from Richard de Stoutz (great site for photos of lenses).
There are 5 different 5cm examples. Most have the long aperture ring "skirt", but sn 524591 looks identical to the one I have and it does not have the extended "skirt". So perhaps there are sample variations in manufacturing. These were the first production lenses and I read (on CameraQuest) that Nikon evolved production methods with these lenses.
I ran my three 28's through the AF museum here. (the series E was too good a deal to pass up and I don't remember how I wound up with both an AI and AI-s) Hope this helps a little with #2
graytrekker wrote:
Hello - this is my first post - ver 2. By that I mean I first posted it on the general Nikon board and it was suggested I re-post here.
I have some older Nikkors from the 70s when I had a Nikkormat. They have been on the shelf for a very long time until I recently got a Df. I really enjoy using these on this camera and would like to add a few more MF lenses to my collection. Specifically, I was looking at a 28mm. I am trying to decide between the f2 and the 2.8. Bjorn Rorslett has the opinion than the 2.8 is sharper for close up, but the 2 is better at infinity. I have read some reviews/comparisons that I have found on various sites - but all of them quite old. There seems little consensus and it may be due to sample variation. My use would be mainly (but not solely) landscape where infinity focus and corner sharpness is important to me.
My question is threefold, as I do rather enjoy the non-AI lenses with the scalloped metal focus ring:
1) Sticking with the pre-AI, pre-K, but still wanting some multi-coating, is there a significant performance difference between the NC Auto variants of the f2 and f2.8?
2) Do you find this same difference (if there is one) in the AI/AIS versions?
3) Is there a significant performance difference between the NC Auto and the AI/AIS versions? [is newer always better?]
Thank you ahead of time for your considered opinions/knowledge!
Thanks for the link . The issue is when you buy the lens online we are not sure which lens comes with what aperture ring skirt. But if you notice on the link lens with sn 522231 has a longer lip and on lens 524239 looks like the extra lip has been filed off as you see the underneath is not smooth.
Venky wrote:
I have the same lens starting with serial # 525.... Will I be able to mount the lens on the Z with the adapter. Please let me know what serial # of your lens. Thanks a lot.
Chris Dees wrote:
Do like me.
Just sold my D500 + grip and 24/3.5 PC-E and ordered Z6 + FTZ + 24-70
The waiting has started, I'll probably get it just before Christmas. Nbr. 2 on the list.
There was a good reason why I had all (almost) my MF-lenses chipped. I'm prepared for the Z.
D850 + 24-70E > 2000grams
Z6 + 24-70 < 1200 grams
I know it's not the same and the first combi is better, but for travel there would be little difference and I'll keep both for the time being.
Now I have to find a good home for my Nippon Kogaku Nikkors. ...Show more →
I have an old Nikkor charity home, send me your old lenses and I will take care of then in their golden years.
Mishu01 wrote:
Doug, do not listen to these pixel peeper guys. The real fact is that both 28 have a nice character. I do prefer f/2 incarnation because I am a low light sucker but the f/2.8 is darn good too! It's much fun using them.
They are all fine, only shortcoming of the 2.0 are point light aberrations fully open, gone by 2.8.
Thanks everyone for their input.
I guess one of the questions I had was focus at infinity (important to landscape) - is the 2 sharper at infinity as Bjorn states?
It's odd that the AI/AIS are cheaper than the pre-AI, especially if they do have better optics/better coatings (do love those scalloped focus rings, though).
I know there are various opinions of KR but I use his info as a resource. It is always easy to criticise but personally I've had lots of useful info from his site.
