david_schofield Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 The 28mm f3.5 is significantly cheaper (and probably lighter) than its more famous brother the f2.8. Does anybody have any experience of the f3.5 version? Should I go for the f2.8? Your comments appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_burnley1 Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 The f3.5 is a sharper lens according to serious tests conducted by Modern Photography some time ago. The resolution scores were significantly higher at middle apertures (peak being f8, I believe) for the f3.5 than the f2.8. The f2.8 with its floating elements and closer focus would be ideal for close ups and would probably better the f3.5 there due to its floating element (or is that plural?). IF you go for the f3.5, get the latest model (smaller front element) as the optics have been improved over the vintage version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin carron Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 I have an older 28 f/3.5 Nikkor. It is generally nice and sharp. However it does tend to suffer from flare (overall lowering of contrast kind) rather more than some other similar vintage primes. It also vignettes easily if you accidentally put on more than one filter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsbhasin Posted September 25, 2002 Share Posted September 25, 2002 Hi David, <p>I got a 28mm/2.8 AIS Series E Nikon and i have shot one roll with it. I found it pretty sharp of a $100 lens. However I have <b>read</b> that the 28mm/2.8 AIS is the better lens. Note my lens is series E lens. <p>Here is a pic i took a few weeks ago with this lens: <a href =http://www.photo.net/photo/1016633&size=md>The band </a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stefan_geysen Posted November 21, 2002 Share Posted November 21, 2002 I have a 28mm f3.5 Ai. The image quality is decent enough. Useable wide open (some vignetting), quite good sharpness stopped down. Good flare resistance. The main drawback, imo, is focusing. A wideangle already has plenty of DOF, and with the f3.5 aperture, the image doesn't really snap into focus. The f3.5 also lacks the f2.8's CRC construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now