Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,715   Posts: 1,483,041   Online: 781
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,180

    Nikon 20mm f3.5 - any good?

    I have a Nikon 18/3.5 which is nice but quite big and heavy. I tend not to use it because if this so I'm wondering if I should trade it for a 20/3.5.

    The 18mm is 350g and extends 61.5mm
    The 20mm is 235g and extends 40.4mm it also uses 52mm filters.

    I know the 18mm has CRC but the 20mm doesn't but I don't think that's going to bother me.

    Does anyone have any experience with the 20/3.5? Please bear in mind I print no larger than 10x8.

    Thanks!
    Steve.

  2. #2
    Jesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Lund in the south of Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    605
    I think that you will be very happy with either 20/3.5 or 20/4.
    They are small and perform very well.

  3. #3
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,808
    Images
    29
    I don't think your paper size has much to bear on your lens size. The difference between 18mm and 20mm is reasonably great, not stupidly great, but great enough to be noticeable in the way certain images are constructed.

    I have the 18mm 3.5 Sigma with Nikon mount that has been modified to take 72mm filters. A good friend had the same but a Nikkor unit, it also takes 72mm filters.

    He also had the 20mm and I can tell you that the CRC feature in the 18mm is amazing by comparison to the 20mm without CRC.

    Eventually he picked up a later 20mm with CRC, I don't know which one it was, but it certainly was a huge difference.

    Mick.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    234
    My 20 3.5, an older version, is probably my favorite 35mm slr lens. I was always pleased by its sharpness.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,180
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick Fagan View Post
    He also had the 20mm and I can tell you that the CRC feature in the 18mm is amazing by comparison to the 20mm without CRC.
    Mick -
    I'm not sure at what focus range CRC works, but I don't do close-up photography with the 18mm, it's just scenes normally focused at the hyper-focal point. The reason I mentioned print size was that often lens imperfections are only noticeable with huge enlargements or pixel peaks.

    I think I'll lose 6° of view by changing from 18mm to 20mm, bit I still have the 16mm which gives me 180°!

    Size and weight are big concerns for me, I think a small 20 that gets used is better than a big 18 that doesn't. Unless, of course, it's a real stinker: would lack of CRC be noticeable in general scenes at 10x8?
    Steve.

  6. #6
    vpwphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,081
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    7
    I never thought much about the 20mm... flair. funny ghosts... I owned 3 different one old ai the others AF
    I now use the 18-35mm ... this lens is very sharp... It got stolen last year and immediately bought another.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    360
    The Tamron SP 20-40 f/2.7-3.5, is every bit as sharp as primes in that focal range. Yes, I didn't believe too, until I procured two of them.

  8. #8
    Rol_Lei Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hamburg
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiron Kid View Post
    The Tamron SP 20-40 f/2.7-3.5, is every bit as sharp as primes in that focal range. Yes, I didn't believe too, until I procured two of them.
    Sharper than which primes?
    M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa

  9. #9
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    All the Nikon 35's are very good. My favorite is the f/4.

    But if you want small, and slightly "better" optically, the Voigtländer is the way to go. It is a lot of money for what it is, though. Personally, with as little as I use a 20mm, I would just try to find a Nikon f/3.5 or f/4. If I really relied on that focal length, I would splurge and get the Voigtländer.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,180
    The f4 seems quite rare and I think commands as higher price as Galen Rowell raved about it (as does Ken Rockwell). The 3.5 is easier to find at least here in the UK. I've looked at that Voigtländer and it does look nice although I haven't found anywhere that would consider a 18/3.5 as a trade/part exchange.
    Steve.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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