Anyone tried the AF 28mm f/1.4D to give comments?

[chgoh]

Hi,

Wondering if anyone on the forum have the AF Nikkor 28mm f/1.4D and could give comments on handling, optics etc.

chgoh

[espn]

Nice feel, nice weight, nice price

Anyway the image seems a bit soft at f/1.4 (off the LCD), noticeable pincushion in the viewfinder.

Colors look great though. But I only played for like 10mins, and it's just me.

[chgoh]

Originally Posted by espn Nice feel, nice weight, nice price Anyway the image seems a bit soft at f/1.4 (off the LCD), noticeable pincushion in the viewfinder. Colors look great though. But I only played for like 10mins, and it's just me.

Hi espn,

That was quick. Never log off one issit?

Noticeable pincushioning @ f1.4? Did you happen to compare it with the AFS17-35's distortion at the 28mm setting? Worse off or better? For the record, I think the 17-35 have extremely well controlled distortion even at 17mm.

Thanks.

chgoh

[espn]

I'm waiting for my team lead to upload something to the shared drive... so... here I am!!

Yep... slight pincushion at 28mm wide.

The 17-35 is perfect at 17mm all the way to 35mm on a DSLR because of the 1.5FLM. Else at 17mm, there's noticeable pincushion also, on a film body, at 28mm it seems to be rather ok, no distortions as such.

[chgoh]

Originally Posted by espn ... Yep... slight pincushion at 28mm wide. ....

What a pity.

So you think that this is still a good lens to have or should I stay with a AF35/2D? Is the extra stop worth it?

chgoh

[espn]

At the same price compared with a 17-35, why not get the 17-35 instead? It's only 1.5 stops difference, you get a wider zoom range that's near pefect on every focal length. Unless you need that 1.4 that badly on a 28mm (42mm FLM).

I have only played with it for ard 10mins and not really used it in application, I'm not able to advise you on comparison to the 35 f/2D which I think is a cheap and good len.

[chgoh]

Originally Posted by espn At the same price compared with a 17-35, why not get the 17-35 instead? It's only 1.5 stops difference, you get a wider zoom range that's near pefect on every focal length. Unless you need that 1.4 that badly on a 28mm (42mm FLM). I have only played with it for ard 10mins and not really used it in application, I'm not able to advise you on comparison to the 35 f/2D which I think is a cheap and good len.

Okay, thanks. Already have the 17-35 and the 35/2D. Was thinking about low light after I sold my 50/1.4D. Is the 28/1.4D going for about 2.5K local wty? How abt Lords' pricing?

By the way, still using all film, so the wideangles are still wideangles.

chgoh

[espn]

Get 85 f1.4 lor heehee. IIRC 28 f/1.4D is about the price of the 17-35, 2.8K or 2.9K.

[chgoh]

Originally Posted by espn Get 85 f1.4 lor heehee. IIRC 28 f/1.4D is about the price of the 17-35, 2.8K or 2.9K.

Probably not. Already have the 85/1.8D which I felt was good enough, lighter and cheaper!

I don't feel the cost and weight penalties for a 1/2 stop faster was justifiable.

chgoh

[Jed]

Okay, so the 28 has pincushion. But the 17-35 is fine on a digital sensor because of a crop. How about the 28 with the crop?

Soft at f1.4? Based on LCD examination? You need to have your LCD checked, not check your LCD.

If you need to shoot at f1.4-f2.6 with a 28mm then it's really a no brainer. If you don't, you don't need to spend the money on this. Hope that's not sounding rude, that's the truth with these and all fast lenses. If you need the aperture you need it, no other way of getting it. If you don't, then you can save the money and buy something cheaper. The 17-35 and 28 don't even compare really.

[espn]

Originally Posted by Jed Okay, so the 28 has pincushion. But the 17-35 is fine on a digital sensor because of a crop. How about the 28 with the crop? Soft at f1.4? Based on LCD examination? You need to have your LCD checked, not check your LCD. If you need to shoot at f1.4-f2.6 with a 28mm then it's really a no brainer. If you don't, you don't need to spend the money on this. Hope that's not sounding rude, that's the truth with these and all fast lenses. If you need the aperture you need it, no other way of getting it. If you don't, then you can save the money and buy something cheaper. The 17-35 and 28 don't even compare really.

I tested the 28 f/1.4 on a D100 and the 17-35 on a D100, F80. I *was* referring to the pincushion of the 28 on a D100, funnily when I tested a 20-35 f/2.8 I also saw pincushion on a D100. I saw pincushion on the F80 for the 17-35, never had a chance to test the 28 f/1.4 on the F80.

I might be wrong, but that's what I saw from the LCD at 28 (42mm) and I said again I only played with it for 10mins, the D100 was not mine, so I can only view off the LCD, which I saw it's soft at f/1.4. Maybe I need to have my eyes checked instead of the LCD.

I was comparing the range of the 17-35 against the 28 prime. I know they don't compare.

[chgoh]

Originally Posted by Jed Okay, so the 28 has pincushion. But the 17-35 is fine on a digital sensor because of a crop. How about the 28 with the crop? Soft at f1.4? Based on LCD examination? You need to have your LCD checked, not check your LCD. If you need to shoot at f1.4-f2.6 with a 28mm then it's really a no brainer. If you don't, you don't need to spend the money on this. Hope that's not sounding rude, that's the truth with these and all fast lenses. If you need the aperture you need it, no other way of getting it. If you don't, then you can save the money and buy something cheaper. The 17-35 and 28 don't even compare really.

Hi Jed,

I understand your angle. I guess when I started the thread I was wondering if the 28/1.4 would be a good buy in place of the 35/2. In practicality, one could still "foot zoom" and load up with ISO400 film to get the shot with a 35/2 if the 28/1.4 was not available. Just wanted just to see if someone had experience with the 28/1.4 before seriously considering it.

chgoh

[Jed]

Well if you have specific questions, I'd be happy to try and help out. Specific.

Espn, no worries.

[chgoh]

Originally Posted by Jed Well if you have specific questions, I'd be happy to try and help out. Specific. Espn, no worries.

Hi Jed,

Thanks for the offer to help. So, when the 28/1.4D is used on a film SLR:

1. any general comments on handling, optics etc?
2. Is it soft when wide open?
3. Is there noticeable barrel/pincushion distortion at any f/stop?

gohch

[Jed]

Originally Posted by chgoh 1. any general comments on handling, optics etc?

I've not had a problem with it. The 72mm thread is a pain in the * but basically I don't filter it to cope with it; not that I filter much.

2. Is it soft when wide open?

Marginally so. I personally think the 85/1.4 is softer wide open than the 28/1.4. But as far as I'm concerned it's very useable.

3. Is there noticeable barrel/pincushion distortion at any f/stop?

There is but that's inherent in most lenses. I consider it very slight. Actually I did a few shots to test and unfortunately have deleted them now. I just assumed Espn was right, but now that I think back, my memory seems to suggest barrel distortion rather than pincushion. If it matters to you say and I'll go back and take more shots.

[chgoh]

Thanks for the comments! Now the hard part: Ignoring the obvious differences from the 35/2 (i.e. focal length and largest stop), how would the 28/1.4 stack up against when used wide open?

chgoh

[Jed]

Depends. Do you mean 28/1.4 at f1.4 and 35/2 at f2, or both at f2? If you mean both at f1.4, there's only one winner. If you mean both at f2, there's only one winner in theory. If you mean both wide open, then I'd not have a response. I don't own a 35/2 but have only used one back in my film days. Ie casual shooting without really having examined the images at great size/magnification.

Ultimately I didn't get this lens for optical quality although it's been fine to date. I got it to use at very wide apertures at which personally anyway I am exceedingly happy with. I rack it to f1.4 fairly often. But then YMMV.