 |
|
|
haringo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 7, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 12
|
|
Review Date: Jan 17, 2016
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, great look on FX, not expensive,
|
|
Cons:
|
feels plastic but I don't care
|
|
This lens shines on an FX body. (There are better looking lens for crop frames. )
Sharp, even at f/2.8. I like the color reproduction. Not as great as a 35mm 1.4 but you can only see the difference in 5-10 percent of the photos.
What I love that this lens doesn't look too "professional". I can walk around and take amazing photos without people looking and staring at me. You can catch amazing real moments without making people shy.
Be careful because it distorts body off center. Try to position people in the middle of the frame. This is not negative because all the 24mm lens does the same.
this is the lens if you want to have an amazing glass for $200.
You can see photos taken with this on my website. www.haringphotography.com Look for the moderate wide angle shots.
|
|
 Jan 17, 2016
|
|
jordkemp
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 16, 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Mar 24, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, small/compact, and works like a charm.
|
|
Cons:
|
f2.8 is the only real negative.
|
|
|
Easy to capture family events inside where tight corners are. I really enjoy it and it compliments the 50 1.4 well.
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2014
|
|
wolfbreath
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 4, 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 17, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Possibly the sharpest lens I used. Great colors. Fast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not a great length to work with on DX format
|
|
|
This is the sharpest lens I've ever used. Amazing. The colors look very nice too. I used it for taking pictures of architecture, of children, street photography, or indoor shots. The lens is fast, and I never had any problems with low light shooting.
I bought this lens with hopes that it could serve as a wide angle lens for landscape but it wasn't wide enough for my taste. My camera is DX crop, so this lens is 36mm which is more like general wide/standard length. That was my only disappointment, so I traded it for an ultra wide zoom. I'm happy with the ultra wide, but regret losing the 24mm. Thinking of upgrading to an FX format, and the 24mm would come in handy.
I'm not sure about the use of this focal length for DX, but if you want a general lens to walk around with, I'd recommend it. I think it would be great on FX. The price is okay. This lens may be overshadowed by the 1.4G, but this lens still has great optics.
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2012
|
|
mohawk51
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 8
|
|
Review Date: Nov 17, 2011
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Nothing compared to the manual version of this lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Too Much Plastic...
|
|
|
I personally wouldn't switch my manual focus 24 lens for this one. I have a latest version of the manual focus with SIC. It a great lens. This one looks too fragile.
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2011
|
|
shivaswrath
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 28, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 28, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, great "normal" view on a DX, nice to have film/FX compatibility, and VERY lighweight (comical almost)
|
|
Cons:
|
does have a tendency to flare in bright, mid-day shots; would recommend buying hood.
|
|
|
This was the "final" prime to be added to my collection (35 1.8G, 50 1.4G, and 60mm AF-S) and I will have to say DESPITE it's age, it is an amazing mechanical piece of work.
I purchased it used as I felt the current $360 offerings are a bit steep (BH/Adorama); at $265 including the metal hood, I feel as if this is a fair price.
I managed to snag an extremely sharp copy, not as sharp as a macro, but very close.
I wanted to have an alternative to the larger wide-lens offerings currently in the Nikon line up: 14-24 2.8 and 24-70 2.8; this lens offers about the same range (+/- 10 to 35mm!) with a weight savings of nearly 1.5lbs!!
I currently own a D200, and this provides an excellent FOV for group shots; on my N75, it's literally ultrawide with minimal distortion that I don't have to worry about correcting for.
Worthwhile investment, just mind the flaring and of course ensure that your copy is sharp and focusing well (since others have complained otherwise on here).
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2009
|
|
snegron
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3285
|
|
Review Date: Dec 11, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $356.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Feels well built despite plastic barrel
|
|
Cons:
|
Over exposes by two stops and appears to have a back focus issue
|
|
|
I needed a small prime in the 24mm focal range for my D200. While I have a 35mm 2.0 AF-D and a 17-55mm 2.8 AF-S, I was looking for an all-around small lens with a semi-normal field of view (at least in terms of DX).
I purchased my 24mm 2.8 AF-D new. After testing it I noticed that all the shots I took with it were over exposed by 2 stops. I have the manual focus version of this lens (the Nikkor 24mm 2.8 AIS), and shot the same scene, same light, same camera; the 24mm AF-D over exposed by two stops compared to the manual focus version. same thing happened when I compared it to the 17-55 (set at 24mm).
I also noticed that there was a back-focusing issue with it as well. The subect photographed was out of focus, but the background was sharp.
I'm sure that if I spent the time adjusting my D200 for this lens' shortcomings everytime I mounted the lens onto the body, I might be able to come up with somewhat acceptable shots. However, I don't feel I should have to waste so much time on this one lens when all of my other lenses perform flawlessly on my D200.
I marked down "reccommended" for this lens mostly because if this is the only semi-wide angle lens you plan to get and like the idea of spending time adjusting your camera settings to make the lens work properly, then this is the lens for you.
Also, as you can see by the amount of posts I have here on this site I am not just making this up to either boost the price of this lens or to fiddle with it's final rating number for whatever reason. It seems like there are many people who sign up here just to rate a lens or camera then never post again. I purchased it, I used it, I didn't like it, I sent it back.
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2009
|
|
Ceko
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 5, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, light, fast
|
|
Cons:
|
bit pricey, prone to ghosting and flares
|
|
|
For me, it's perfect for street photography. It's very very sharp (I sometimes read reviews that say the opposite, maybe I've just got a very good sample?) and the best of all is that people aren't easily overwhelmed by such a tiny lens. It handles well but be careful to use a good sunhood because it's prone to flares and ghosting easily.
|
|
|
May 25, 2009
|
|
sankeycottage
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 29, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 2, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid feel - good price - tack sharp - superb on D3x at 24mm.
|
|
Cons:
|
Lens hood not supplied with lens - not fast by modern standards.
|
|
|
One of Nikon's less publicised gems this 24mm Nikkor is absolute class! Superb wideangle optics - sharp at all apertures -great contrast - superb colour definition. Now that Nikon has the D700, D3 and D3x this lens has reinvented itself and is a magnificent wideangle on a FX camera!
|
|
|
May 2, 2009
|
|
klinker
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 14, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice build. Good focusfeeling for that money. lightweight. universal usability
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic, but for that price its not really con
|
|
|
nice lens! good haptic.
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2008
|
|
Rayder
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 15, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 66
|
|
Review Date: Aug 30, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very, very sharp, especially close-up. Well built, inexpensive, small.
|
|
Cons:
|
Dark corners wide open (FX only). Need hood to cut down flare in the sun.
|
|
|
This is one of those little gems. Stopped down to 4, it's sharp and even illumination across the film. It's also very compact, well built and priced right. None of the kit lenses come close.
|
|
|
Aug 30, 2008
|
|
dj dunzie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 7044
|
|
Review Date: Apr 2, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very good performance for the dollar, lightweight and well built
|
|
Cons:
|
Still not as sharp as the standard set by the ultra-cheap 50mm f1.8
|
|
|
I owned both a 20mm and a 28mm prime and used both for digital, and I can honestly say they both disappointed after having owned the 50mm f1.8. I found the CA / purple fringing unbearable on the 28mm, and the 20mm wasn't nearly up to the sharp, vivid results produced by the bargain-priced 50mm.
So with low expectations I bought this lens and despite other reports I read, found the performance to be at least in the same league as the 50, and the build a little heavier duty. Focussing was accurate and results were sharp - albeit still not quite as sharp as the 50mm. Still, after comparing the 28 and 20, this is the only one in the wider spectrum I found that made an acceptable mate with the 85mm and 50mm Nikkors for a good prime combo on digital.
Keep in mind this review is based on DX sensors only. The lens got a lot of use with the D70s and D200, and I used the lens a LOT. It's a near-perfect focal range for group shots and tighter settings, at least until the need for an ultra-wide arises. I have heard that the 20mm and 28mm lenses do perform much better on film bodies than DX sensors - I can only hope that's true.
So having bought the lens with lowered expectations, I can say I was happily surprised by the results this lens produces. I have since HAD to trade in the lens towards the 17-55mm f2.8 in order to help offset the cost. It's the one lens I could part with without losing some aspect of my kit, other than the 50mm which doesn't bring enough trade value to be worthwhile. Otherwise, I'd still be firing away happily with this lens.
|
|
|
Apr 2, 2007
|
|
goletitout
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Feb 13, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, reasonably sharp, better built than 50 1.8
|
|
Cons:
|
CA, Flare, not sharper than kit lens.
|
|
|
Iīve also found that the 24 2.8 AF-D is quite sharp wide open, but that it doesnīt get a lot sharper stopped down. At f8, my 18-70 Nikkor zoom lens (@24mm) IS equally as sharp as the 24mm 2.8 at f8, with the kit lens having LESS CA and flare than the prime...and the kit lens does even get better @35mm or 50mm ! I canīt recommend the 24mm 2.8, unless you want to do a lot of low light photography @24mm (36mm in digital). And you also have to consider that the 18-70 is less expensive than the 24 2.8 ! I think Iīll try the 35mm f2 instead as everybody (and I mena REALLY EVERYBODY) says itīs at least as good as the Nikkor pro zooms @35mm while sporting an f2 aperture. And Iīll definitely keep my 18-70. I think itīs VERY good as a kit lens, at the upper end of consumer grade glass.
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2006
|
|
markomarko
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 14, 2004
Location: N/A
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Feb 10, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice size/ aperature ring is nice. Sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
Unacceptable barrel distortion. Flares very easily. Shooting into the sun is not an option.
|
|
|
I would love to see this lens updated to use all nikon's latest technological wizardry. It is sharp. However, save for the max. aperature, it is so outperformed by the 18-70 kit zoom in terms of distortion, flare, and ghosting, that I really only carry it if I feel I absolutely must travel light.
I am amazed at the overall 9.5 rating this lens has at FM reviews. Please people, be a little more rational about your ratings. Your endorsement helped convince me to buy what turns out to be only a so-so lens.
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2006
|
|
pik2004
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
VEry sharp, light works with film and digital
|
|
Cons:
|
digital is not as sharp as Film.
|
|
|
it's light, small and can be carried anywhere.
I used this lens mostly for my landscape on my film camera. I love the landscape pictures it takes. it also take pretty good group shots with minimal distotion, I use it for low light indoor group shots instead of tokina 12-24mm f4.
|
|
|
Jan 1, 2006
|
|
BryanP
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 162
|
|
Review Date: Dec 26, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, great wide-angle for digital.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
I recommend these lens over the 28/2.8s. They're much sharper, same build quality and has extra features already stated down below. I don't see any flaw with this lens. It has a digital length of ~35mm which is great for a general array of wide-angle shots.
I highly recommend this lens.
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2005
|
|
phiggys
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 7, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 25
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $165.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Top drawer quality small, light, fast and sharp at any aperture.
Will beat even the best pro zooms for image quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Has been in my wedding kit bag from day one after changing to the Nikon system in January 1991.
Along with AF35mm f2.0, AF 50mm 1.8 and AF 85mm f1.8.
Used at more weddings for group shots than I care to remember.
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
17
|
130817
|
Jan 17, 2016
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
82% of reviewers
|
$241.38
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.27
|
7.73
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
