Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,523   Posts: 1,572,257   Online: 752
      
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 46 of 46
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    40
    I was thinking about a 28, but then I decided on a BGN 24mm from KEH for $108. It's beautiful!

  2. #42
    Matt5791's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England, Birmingham
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by cherryrig View Post
    Yea I'm not too fussed with getting up close with my lens to be fair as I have a 60mm Micro for that actaully.

    I just want something that is nice and wide and fast(ish)

    28mm AIS are just going for silly money to me it seems

    24mm maybe a cheaper pick???
    24mm will cost you more generally.

    Also the AIS 28mm are going for silly money - silly cheap. This lens new is £615 at Grays of Westminster.

  3. #43
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    If the AI-S 28 is too much, get an AF-D. It's spectacular optically (I had one for a few years before selling it to get a 20-35/2.8D) and I would easily own one again. They cost about $200 US new. The AI-S outperforms it at very close focus distances, but otherwise there is little to choose between them.
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    279
    Quality on the slow 28's goes -> AI-S, AF-D, AI/Pre-AI (multi-coated 3.5 marginally better than the 2.8), AF, E.

    The E series primes get better as they get longer. The 28's the worst and the 135's the best (with the 100 a close second).

  5. #45
    katphood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Bay Area, Calif. USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    100
    Images
    5
    I just ran some tests; my 28 2.8 AIS vs. my 28 3.5 K (AI'd). BTW, I used both lenses on a Canon EOS body (with half-frame sensor) via the same adaptor. Thus, focus depended on my eyes only w/ neither a split prism nor a hot focus point to rely on. On a good Nikon film camera, the results might be a bit different.

    Note also that my tests were oriented toward my interests: nature photography. I often shoot into the sun so I always test for flare. I also often use scale focusing stopped down. Notice however that much of my testing was indoors where I can control the light. It's a windy, partly cloudy day, making lens testing a little hard.

    So here's my entirely subjective conclusion:

    Indoors, close focus: 28 f3.5 K is noticeably sharper at every aperture from 3.5 to 11 (did not go beyond that). Even the blurry areas (beyond DOF) were sharper on the 3.5.

    Indoors, lenses focused at their hyperfocal distance: roughly equal in the centers, a slight advantage to the AIS in the corners.

    Outdoors, lenses focused at their hyperfocal distance: roughly equal in the centers and corners. Some advantage to the AIS on objects in the infinity distance.

    Flare: Advantage to the 3.5 K (AI'd) when including the sun in the frame. Both flare a bit, but I didn't find the 3.5 to be objectionable at all whereas the 2.8 can have some large annoying zombie blobs growing out of the sun.

    Notes:

    - For those of you that scale focus, the 3.5 is much easier to use than the 2.8. I noticed the hash marks on the chrome are farther apart on my 3.5 than the 2.8. I appreciate that.

    - Build quality is excellent on both lenses.

    - Both are multicoated, but since the AIS I have may have been manufactured 10-15 years later than the K, I suspect its multicoating might be, I dunno, better?

    Lastly, I got my 3.5 AI'd K lens on eBay for $65 + shipping. I believe I got the AIS on KEH for about $200. In terms of bang for the buck, a big advantage for the older lens!
    Nikon FM2n (20/3.5, 28/3.5, 50/1.8, 55/3.5, 135/2.8), Pentax 645n (55/2.8), 3rd Eye Cameraworks 6x18 (on its way)

    http://kthompson.jalbum.net/KurtThompson/index.html

  6. #46
    nicefor88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Bruxelles, Belgique
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    250
    I personally believe the 35 f2 is a much better choice. Less distortion.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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