nikon AF 28mm f/1.4D

[jtb]

Does anybody has any idea how good is this lens?

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by jtb Does anybody has any idea how good is this lens?

Very good. Supposed to be coma corrected and very sharp. Was using it mainly for film haven't have any digital images to show.

[jtb]

just wonder it is suitable for D100 & 200......

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by jtb just wonder it is suitable for D100 & 200......

Yes, it works fine but then angle is not wide enough. It's more like spending a lot of money for a 'normal' (after crop factor it's about 42mm) lens which is too long for wide angle shots and too short as medium tele for portraiture.

[deadpixel]

For the kind of money you'd need to plonk down for this lens, you'd might want to try the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC. Very sharp lens with smooth as silk bokeh... most people I know who own this lens love it.

Only problem is that it has very little resale value

I haven't uploaded any proper photos with this lens, but here's a test one that I uploaded last year to show someone what the lens can do:

This is the image, captured at f/1.4:


Look at its bokeh

This is a 100% crop


It's so sharp that you can actually see the ink bleeds in the Nikon logo of the SB-800 box. I was only going to get the flash but ended up with both

_

[Cheesecake]

Originally Posted by deadpixel For the kind of money you'd need to plonk down for this lens, you'd might want to try the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC. Very sharp lens with smooth as silk bokeh... most people I know who own this lens love it. Only problem is that it has very little resale value I haven't uploaded any proper photos with this lens, but here's a test one that I uploaded last year to show someone what the lens can do: It's so sharp that you can actually see the ink bleeds in the Nikon logo of the SB-800 box. I was only going to get the flash but ended up with both _

how much u paid for it... ? looks interesting!

[deadpixel]

Originally Posted by Cheesecake how much u paid for it... ? looks interesting!

I think it's priced at about $730. Was at a shop just now and saw two persons buy this lens in the span of about 1 1/2 hours, one for Nikon and the other for Canon.

_

[Cheesecake]

Originally Posted by deadpixel I think it's priced at about $730. Was at a shop just now and saw two persons buy this lens in the span of about 1 1/2 hours, one for Nikon and the other for Canon. _

S$730!

[Minimalis]

Originally Posted by Cheesecake S$730!

Huh $730? Nikon's list price is $3215.

[deadpixel]

Originally Posted by Minimalis Huh $730? Nikon's list price is $3215.

No, no...

The $730 is for Sigma's 30mm f/1.4 EX DC, which is a worthy challenger against Nikon's 28 f/1.4 in terms of bokeh, contrast and sharpness.

_

[Astin]

If money is not a problem, I would suggest the Nikon AF 28mm f/1.4D, its not easy to find though.

[deadpixel]

Originally Posted by Astin If money is not a problem, I would suggest the Nikon AF 28mm f/1.4D, its not easy to find though.

Saw one in J316 last week.

_

[Cheesecake]

Originally Posted by Minimalis Huh $730? Nikon's list price is $3215.

28 f1.4? X1000

[ipin]

for that kind of price, why not get the AF 35mm f/2D for less than S$500 new?

[tommon]

A rule of thumb. A prime lens is always better than any zooms.

[clubgrit]

Originally Posted by tommon A rule of thumb. A prime lens is always better than any zooms.

That rule is too general, and taking it as it is, is not true. It's like saying only blondes have more fun To put it into better perspective, this guy explains it well in his answer to a query :

http://www.garryblack.com/ae12.htm

[Cheesecake]

Originally Posted by tommon A rule of thumb. A prime lens is always better than any zooms.

gimme AFS 17-35 f2.8, AFS28-70 f2.8 and AFS 70-200 f2.8VR anytime.

[ipin]

Originally Posted by Cheesecake gimme AFS 17-35 f2.8, AFS28-70 f2.8 and AFS 70-200 f2.8VR anytime.

With advances in optics technology and know-how, certain zooms nowadays can compare with primes.

[taker]

Originally Posted by tommon A rule of thumb. A prime lens is always better than any zooms.

True, prime lenses are not as versatile as their zoom counterparts, but are often of superior optical quality and lower cost. This is because the designs are simpler (fewer moving parts), and can be optimized for one particular focal length, whereas zoom lenses must function at a variety of focal lengths.

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by taker True, prime lenses are not as versatile as their zoom counterparts, but are often of superior optical quality and lower cost. This is because the designs are simpler (fewer moving parts), and can be optimized for one particular focal length, whereas zoom lenses must function at a variety of focal lengths.

That is true. But the fact that many primes are old design, so if you compare them to modern zooms, some of them may even lose out to the better modern zooms designed with the aid of computer technology.