Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,849   Posts: 1,582,824   Online: 740
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    410
    It seems from this guy's opinion you have a better chance of a good copy if you choose the f2.8

    http://www.archiphoto.com/personal%20pages/Nikon.html

  2. #12
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  3. #13
    narsuitus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    571
    I have the Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AIS and the pre-AI Nikon 28mm f/3.5. Both are excellent lenses. I prefer the f/2.8 for shooting landscapes and general subjects. I prefer the f/3.5 mounted in reverse position on bellows for shooting close-ups and macros.

    I paid more for my f/3.5 than I did for my f/2.8.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/11336821@N00/6179456359/
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Lenses 62b labeled sml.jpg  

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,983
    I own the AI version of the f/3.5 for like 5 or 6 years. I lost it along with the Nikon F2AS. I currently have the f/2.8 version and I can't say which one is sharper but there is one thing that it seems the pics I take recently are not as sharp as those I took in the late 70's and early 80's. It's me or it's my lenses I don't know. So there Peter I hope I have an answer for you but I don't.

  5. #15
    OldBodyOldSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    209
    Ask the seller to tell you the serial number of the 28. Then go here: http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html
    Click on 28 at the top and find your lens type by the serial number. If the lens is AI-S, take the 28. If not then I say it doesn't matter unless you have a preference when it comes to focal length.
    f/2.8 AI-S has CRC and is incredibly sharp when shooting close. To make things sweeter, its MFD is only 8in (20cm). As opposed to most other wide Nikkors, the way f/2.8 AI-S renders the OOF areas is very pleasing (though this is highly subjective) and it has very nice colors.
    Last edited by OldBodyOldSoul; 02-10-2013 at 04:59 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: unless you have instead of since you don't have (assumption is the mother of all bad posts)

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    47
    what camera are you going to use it with? if the camera has a bright finder and split focusing screen then both would be fine. If, on the other hand, the finder is dim or you don't like split focusing then I would recommend the 2.8. The only 28 I have is a non-ai 3.5 and I find it harder to focus than the 24/2.8.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    460
    Images
    14
    The 28/2.8 AIS with close focus of 0.2 m is one of the best lenses Nikon ever made. I have this lens, and the 28/3.5 AI. Both are sharp at infinity at all apertures, but the 2.8 is sharper all the way to closest focus, and the fact that it focuses so close is a major advantage for some types of photography. I would not hesitate to get the 2.8 if it is for normal photography. The 3.5 is better for infrared, though. It is a nice lens, but in terms of usefulness not in the same class as the 2.8 AIS.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    843
    This question has come up before in other forums. I have two 28/3.5 AIs, a 28/3.5 'K', an H and a cm. They are all good. The 'K' kas better coating that the two older lenses. The AI lenses are very good. It doesn't matter to me that the 28/2.8 AIS has CRC and is sharper in the close range. I always carry a macro lens anyway. All ofthe 55/3.5 Micro Nikkors from the Micro Nikkor Auto compensating lens to the 55/2.8 AIS are much sharper than the 28/2.8 AIS in the close range and have much less distortion. If I need the effect of closer focusing with a 28 I can use a 28/1.8 Konica UC Hexanon. It also has a floating element design and is faster. The old 5mm Canon manual extension tube can be used with a number of Canon 28mm lenses. At the right price I wouldn't mind adding a 28/2.8 AIS to my Nikon collection but I wouldn't expect any improvement over the 28/2.8 AIS in regular shooting and I also wouldn't expect it to be nearly as good as a Micro Nikkor in the close-up range.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    460
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by dynachrome View Post
    This question has come up before in other forums. I have two 28/3.5 AIs, a 28/3.5 'K', an H and a cm. They are all good. The 'K' kas better coating that the two older lenses. The AI lenses are very good. It doesn't matter to me that the 28/2.8 AIS has CRC and is sharper in the close range. I always carry a macro lens anyway. All ofthe 55/3.5 Micro Nikkors from the Micro Nikkor Auto compensating lens to the 55/2.8 AIS are much sharper than the 28/2.8 AIS in the close range and have much less distortion. If I need the effect of closer focusing with a 28 I can use a 28/1.8 Konica UC Hexanon. It also has a floating element design and is faster. The old 5mm Canon manual extension tube can be used with a number of Canon 28mm lenses. At the right price I wouldn't mind adding a 28/2.8 AIS to my Nikon collection but I wouldn't expect any improvement over the 28/2.8 AIS in regular shooting and I also wouldn't expect it to be nearly as good as a Micro Nikkor in the close-up range.
    You'd be surprised. I have a 28/2.8 AI. Compared to the AIS it is a dog. I also have the 55/3.5 Auto Micro. It is as sharp as the 28/2.8 AIS in the close range, but not sharper. It peaks at 1:10 magnification. There are sharper lenses in the 1:1 to 1:3 range. If you haven't used the lens in question extensively, how can you make assertions about it?

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    105
    Hi friends,thank you for all these replies!
    I eventually bought the 28 3.5 28 2.8 because the seller already sold it, so now it isn't important to talk about the 2.8 versions.
    Rather, I have to ask you one thing: I mounted this lens on my nikon fe and I noticed that looking into the viewer, the numbers of the diaphragms are not visible.This detail it isn't important to me,but I hope this detail doesn't mean this lens is not suitable for my Nikon FE?
    Thank you very much!

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin