Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,666   Posts: 1,481,710   Online: 735
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    205
    ** Sigma Super-Wide II f2.8 24mm. Very good value for money. **

    I third that.

    After a very good experience with the similar 28mm for Nikon, I got the 24mm (auto focus version) for my Pentax. It's bright, sharp, and well corrected. The AF version focusses fast. Build quality is nice, it looks a bit like contemporary Nikon lenses.
    My other camera is a Pentax

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA., U.S.A.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by mudman View Post
    Tamron makes a wonderful 24mm f2.5 adaptall lens. Tack sharp even wide open, with little distortion.
    The other advantage of the Tamron Adaptall II, is that,
    you can change the mount, to use it, with your
    Pentaxes & Olympuses, fully coupled.
    A good match to this is the Tamron 17 mm f 3.5 !

  3. #13
    rthomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,089
    If you want the best of both a low price and a Nikkor lens, don't overlook the Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 (*not* the PC lens). I haven't priced them lately, but I used to own one and it was a solid lens for not much money.

  4. #14
    nicefor88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Bruxelles, Belgique
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    250
    Please please don't sell your FE2!!
    I'm puzzled about what you mean by fortune. Sure Nikkor lenses have never been cheap but their price are much lower than in the 1980s, comparatively.
    A 35mm f2 mint is usually sold around 200 dollars, is that kind of price what you mean by fortune? Used lenses can be grabbed for much less.
    A 35mm f2.8 is much cheaper.
    This focal length does everything except coffee

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Dedham, Ma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    625
    [QUOTE=Chaplain Jeff;783946]Hello,

    The Nikkor 24mm is a great lens - I have the f/2.8 AIc. Just be aware that it is a REAL wide angle lens and you will have all sorts of headaches if you shoot scenes of church steeples, etc., if you're not careful about what you're doing. The lens will bend the steeple backwards if you don't shoot straight. This was the lens that prompted me to buy the grid screen for each of my Nikon bod
    Quote Originally Posted by Chaplain Jeff View Post
    ..Personally I prefer the 28mm lenses, but I am probably in a minority here. I use the 28mm on SLRs and RFs as my standard lens on about 85% of my shooting.

    I almost never use a 35mm length lens. Too narrow for wide and too wide for portraits.

    I think the same way.

    The 28mm was my standard lens until I found a short 28-100 zoom, the 85mm was my other most used lens, the 35 was never used - I eventually gave it away. I guess I'm saying I'd choose the 24 over the 35, or save your money if you have a 20, 28 and 40.

    I'm also of the opinion that having too many lenses is not a good thing. I have too many for my RB, but not the 75mm (37mm equivalent). After paying retail prices for lenses some years ago I went overboard picking more at current prices. Now I feel that having closely spaced focal lengths is somewhat foolish, it's more difficult to choose which ones to go out with, and lugging them all is equally foolish. At one point I felt I had too many 35mm cameras, so I gave a couple of them away to friends - finding the 28-100 zoom was also a factor in that decision.
    "Pictures are not incidental frills to a text; they are essences of our distinctive way of knowing." Stephen J. Gould

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by rthomas View Post
    If you want the best of both a low price and a Nikkor lens, don't overlook the Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 (*not* the PC lens). I haven't priced them lately, but I used to own one and it was a solid lens for not much money.
    What do you have against the PC Nikkor, other than it is big and slow, it seems to have wonderful optics...
    David

  7. #17
    John_Nikon_F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Duvall, WA, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,247
    Images
    2
    Two fairly affordable choices:

    Nikkor-N or NC 24f2.8 with AI conversion ring (or mill job)
    Nikkor-O 35f2 with AI ring, or again, mill job.

    Should be able to pick up both in decent condition for $150.

    -J
    APUG: F4, F3P, F2ASx2, F FTn, FM2n, Nikomat FT2x2 - all blk bodies
    DPUG: D200
    Nikkors: 18-70/3.5-4.5G AF-S DX (for DPUG), 28/3.5 H, 35/2 O, 35-135/3.5-4.5 AF, 50/1.4 S, 50/1.4 SC, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 Micro AIS, 85/1.8 K, 180/2.8 ED AIS

    My FB - My flickr stream

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by nicefor88 View Post
    Please please don't sell your FE2!!
    I'm puzzled about what you mean by fortune. Sure Nikkor lenses have never been cheap but their price are much lower than in the 1980s, comparatively.
    A 35mm f2 mint is usually sold around 200 dollars, is that kind of price what you mean by fortune? Used lenses can be grabbed for much less.
    A 35mm f2.8 is much cheaper.
    This focal length does everything except coffee


    It was while I was writing a description for the ad for the FE2 that I realised that I couldn't bring myself to sell it - but the zoom has to go!!!

    When I wrote "a small fortune" I meant "about double what I currently have in my lens budget" so maybe it was a slight exaggeration, but I take your point that they are relatively cheap when compared to their original prices.

    I've decided to go for either a 35mm or 50mm lens so that I have a good, general walk-around kit. I've given the the Birthday Fairy (ie my partner) a list with a few options that include the words "Nikon" and "lens" so I'll see what happens in June .

    How do people rate the Series E lenses??

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    580
    I have a 20mm, a 24mm and a 28mm. I find myself using the 20mm; other wise an 85mm a Micro-Nikkor 55mm or a Micro-Nikkor 105mm or the 200mm f/4

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    329
    Some of the e series are great, some not so much from what I've heard. I've used two - the 50mm f1.8 which is decent, but not as nice as the AIS Nikkor and the 70-150 f3.5 which is a great lightweight lens that I sometimes use when I need reach but don't want to haul around the 80-200 or several focal lengths. sometimes if I'm really weight concious I'll just bring a 28mm AF, 35 f2 and the 70-150.

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