AF 28 f/1.4 D

<p>Interesting!<br>

As you guys had predicted, it seems that the above lens price is already going down here in Japan.<br>

There is very trusty store where I some times buy used equipment. I check their web page everyday to see what new things they have.<br>

Until a few weeks ago every time they had one of these lenses the price was around 350,000 Japanese Yens and it would be sold out within minutes.<br>

Now they have one in mint condition and the price is just 224,800 Japanese Yen and it's been there a couple of hours already and it hasn't been sold...</p>

 

<p>Nice, at least the lens is current I can wait. I waited enough for the 28mm ;-)</p>

<p>I like this lens and a 200/2. </p>

<p>I'm glad to see the 28/1.4 price go down but it's still rare to find one on sale. I tried searching for one on e-bay in Europe and found only a pouch. ;-)</p>

<p>Well..... I just check again and the lens is still there.....<br>

The name is Map Camera and they are located in Tokyo. the lens has 6 month warranty and i have bought many times from there and never had a problem.<br>

I know they sell to foreign countries so if anyone is interested here is the URL:<br>

http://www.mapcamera.com/shopping/search.php?reset=1&shop=map&category_id=&maker_id=&class=&sort=1&limit=100&view_type=image_only&keywords=20100325<br>

<strong>I got nothing to do with this store so please don't think I am trying to make a sell or something like that.</strong></p>

<p>Rene, how much is the 24mm/f1.4 AF-S in Japan? I know it is still in short supply, but if one is buying an f1.4 wide angle, wouldn't they be better off getting the 24mm AF-S, even though they may have to wait a bit?</p>

<p>Unless you are a collector or somehow you have to buy a 28mm instead of a 24mm, 225K yen is still a lot of money to pay for a used 28mm/f1.4 that has no AF-S and is a much older design. (225K yen means that used 28mm/f1.4 AF-D is still more expensive than a new 24mm/f1.4 AF-S, or at least around the same price.)</p>

<p>Shun... I completely agree with you! I would never even think about it coz I'm not a collector and I'd rather have a wider lens with AFS and better coatings. <br>

Then again there are people who might not think the way we do...<br>

Anyway, at the same place (Map Camera) the 24 is going for 218,800 JPY. Still cheaper than the used 28 mm but they don't have it on stock. This is store has the best prices that I have ever found over here.</p>

 

I am not sure if the link will work: http://www.mapcamera.com/shopping/item.php?map_code=4960759025890

<p>According to the price comparison website (kakaku.com), the cheapest offered price of AF-S 24/1.4 is 205,997 JPY.</p>

<p>FWIW, COP of AF-S 16-35/4.0 is 111,700 JPY.</p>

<p>Just for clarity, 1 USD is approx 92 Yen</p>

<p>So,</p>

<p>225K Yen is USD 2,445<br />219K Yen is USD 2,380</p>

<p>The key to any price is availability. A low price is meaningless if a store doesn't actually have it in stock. If they can sell it to you now (or in most cases if they can deliver it within a day or two), it is a real price. If you have to get onto some waiting list for a few months, of course the price can be a lot cheaper.</p>

<p>keh.com has one in EX conditions offered for $2,999.</p>

<p>Wow.</p>

<p>24/1.4 is on "my list" of things I want but probably never get..... so is a 200/2, and Audi R8 and a 50 ft yacht.... :)</p>

<p>Now, I would not even think of spending more on a 28/1.4.... but then someone pointed out that that Leica-M 24 f1.4 is $6,500, so all things are relative.....</p>

<p>One more thing to consider in the price in Japan when comparing it with US price - all the prices in Japan include sales tax (5%). So, the cheapest price is "almost" par with the US price....</p>

<p>Shun, the shops that offered the price I quoted have the lenses in stock, according to the site. Actually, the shop that offered the cheapest price for 24/1.4 is the one I have dealt with in the past. The shop was very responsive both in terms of shipping and communication.</p>

<p>Some really sentimental people think that there is a difference in the "signature" of the 28mm/1.4D because of the polished ASPHERICAL element versus the more modern molded one in the new 24mm/1.4G. The jury is still out on that one and may never return.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>As I have pointed out before, Bjorn Rorslett has tested three samples of the older 28mm/f1.4 AF-D and does not think it is all that great.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=79334">Bjorn Rorslett</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /></a>, Aug 16, 2007; 05:15 p.m.</p>

<p>As to the original subject under discussion, the AF 28/1.4, I'm amongst the people not understanding why this lens is so appealing. I've tried several samples and they were good, but in no way spectacular. Once I even purchased a factory new sample for $900, and returned it because I wasn't satisfied with it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00MFh1">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00MFh1</a></p>

<p>I'd say wait another 6 months when the new 24mm/f1.4 AF-S is widely avaiable and its own price drops at least 10% from the initial suggested price; we'll revisit the value for the old 28mm/f1.4. If it can stay at $3000 at KEH, I think it is pretty clear that it is merely due to collector interest.</p>

<p>They sell those within minutes? Man, the word "otaku" gets an entirely new meaning for me!<br>

But it wasn't hard to predict that the 28/1.4 would become cheaper since the 24/1.4 is very clearly in the same market. I would expect the price of the 28/1.4 to stabilize somewhere a bit below from the price of the 24/1.4 but not dirt cheap by any means.</p>

<p>For night photography in available light, which is what the thing was made for, the 28/1.4 seems to do fine:</p>

<p><cite>www.flickr.com/photos/mureena/2722286194/</cite></p>

<p>By comparison, the 17-35 looks pretty poor, and that's at f/8 where some people think all lenses are equal ... (in reality performance can vary substantially even at this aperture). It goes without saying that a lens needs to be tested in the intended application, and there is little point in making sweeping generalizations based on subjective observations on image quality without specifying the subject matter.</p>

<p>The 28mm vs. 24mm images look different. I simply prefer 28mm for people subjects, and for the time being will continue to use manual focus 28/2's for this. I could make do with a 35 for this, but not 24mm. I do use 24mm for architecture and some landscapes, but the 24 PC-E is more suitable for the way I photograph these subjects than a f/1.4.</p>

<p>Since the 24/1.4 has just recently become available, the price is likely to fall from its current value, taking the price of the 28/1.4 down with it, unless of course people are like me and won't take a 24 as a substitute for a 28. (Incidentally, I'm not planning on purchasing either at this time. 1200EUR is about max what I would be willing to pay for a used lens of this type, and maybe 1500 EUR for a new one with SWM. Of course, as I grow older, and as my vision goes I may have to get an autofocus lens but hopefully by that time there will be plenty of options and I won't have to compromise aesthetics to get the latest features.)</p>

<p>To add, I haven't seen a comparable comparison for f/2.8 or wider apertures, I would expect the 28/1.4 to be nicely against zooms or other 28mm primes at f/2-f/2.8 especially in night light where there are point light sources in the frame.</p>

<p>I'll add that like the 28mm a fast lens does have drawbacks. It is a fast lens, for many applications I think it is more than good enough, but obviously it may have some drawbacks.</p>

<p>I'm rather puzzled by the fact that the 28/1.4 was just discontinued by Nikon (2006?) due to lack of interest apparently. If that's true, why is Nikon even introducing a 24/1.4 and why is anyone interested in it?</p>

<p>I happen to be interested in the new 24/1.4, but does anyone have a theory on this?</p>

<p>Steve, some said it was high cost and complex manufacturing ... maybe less demand I guess. If there was demand Nikon IMO would of continued. </p>

<p>I just did some night shots comparing digital and film, at f/11 but the digital had a 18-200vr man the viewfinder was so dark than the 1.8 lens on film. I switched it to 2.8 and compared it, not bad, but 1.8 still better, lol. </p>

<p>not worth the money, really...over 2500 dollars?!</p>

<p>Good to hear, the 28/1.4 was whacky expensive. After I received my D700, I posted a WTB ad locally for either a 17-35/2.8 or a 28/1.4. I got a few hits in the 17-35, but the only offer I got on the 28m was $2800. Picking up the 17-35 for $900 was a no-brainer.</p>