Jump to content

28mm f2.8 AIS on a D810


User_4754088

Recommended Posts

<p>Has anyone shot the classic Nikon 28mm f2.8 A.I.S. lens on the Nikon D810 and would like to share their experience?</p>

<p>I'll be starting a project in a few weeks that I originally wanted to shoot on Medium Format film, but there just isn't the budget. I have heard so many great things about the D810 and how it's Medium Format in a 35mm package, but I'm concerned about a few of my older Nikon optics when paired with it.</p>

<p>So if anyone has shot this combination, I'd love to hear your thoughts and maybe see some results. Just want to make sure the higher resolution sensor doesn't make the optics look like hell.</p>

<p>Best,<br>

-Tim</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>It sounds like the objective is to get results similar to medium-format film, and given the high resolution from the D810, it is possible. But then you need to pair the D810 with a top-of-the-line lens and use that lens at an optimal aperture to achieve such results. E.g. using any lens wide open is probably not ideal for this purpose.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Your pictures will be exactly the same as on any other camera. Lens flaws may show up when pixel-peeping, but will not affect prints made at the same size.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In that case, doesn't it totally defeat the purpose for using a D810 to begin with (in order to achieve medium-format-film-like results), if the results from the D810 will be like those from, for example, a D700?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Actually, I failed to ask the OP some important questions about the nature of the project. As long as he will not be shooting wide open because bokeh, I doubt if there will be any problem. Most lenses, except (of course) Crappy Kit Lenses®, are indistinguishable once you are two or three stops down from maximum aperture. I am also curious whether the OP <em>owns</em> a D800, which it seems he does not. If not, you can buy a <em>lot</em> of film and processing for the cost of a D800.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>If you do not yet have a D810, and you would buy it only for this project, I'd revisit the idea of doing it with medium format - you can get the gear second hand, plenty of film and still spent less than a D810. And once the project is over, you can sell the MF gear for basically the same price, while the D810 will have lost a significant bit of value. The tricky bit is if you'd want to scan the negatives yourself, a decent scanner can cost a bit. But still doable within the same price range.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thanks for all the responses. I will be needing to make prints of minimum 16" x 20" size, some bigger, which is why I originally considered Medium Format. I have a D4 and D700 that I use for work, but the images from them start to get strained when you go 16 x 20 and bigger.</p>

<p>I looked at a number of used Medium Format kits, but as the project is a combination of landscape, architecture, portraiture, and photojournalism, it would need to be a rather complex Medium Format package. Also, Medium Format equipment in good shape is getting tougher to come by, I guess folks are hanging on to what they have because the market is so depressed. </p>

<p>I have all the Nikkor glass already, just would need the D810 body. So I am looking into that option.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The comments that your pictures will be the same with that lens on any camera are incorrect if they are referring to film versus digital. The differences are more pronounced the shorter the focal length of the lens and are most noticeable towards the edges of the images where the light is coming at a significant angle to the surface of the film or sensor. Film has a very thin emulsion so the light simply strikes the surface of the film and makes the exposure. Digital camera sensors have glass over the surface of the sensor which is normally around 2mm thick in the case of Nikon. When the light strikes the glass at an angle it is refracted as it passes through the glass and strikes a different point on the sensor than it would in the case of film. The amount of refraction is affected by the color of the light like with a prism.<br /> A 28mm lens is short enough to start showing this distortion. I have not tried that lens on a D810 so I can't say how noticeable it will be. I just wanted you to be aware of this potential effect with shorter lenses.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>16x20 is not particularly large. Wedding and portraits photographers sell them every day, often from DX cameras. A D4 or D700 is more than adequate for that size. If your images are looking "strained" at 16x20 you need to look at your technique, not your camera. Make sure you're on a tripod, make sure you're hitting the sweet spot of aperture where you're stopped down for optimal sharpness but not so far as to get diffraction. Make sure your shutter speed is high enough to stop any motion blur or camera shake (remember, use a tripod). Make sure focus is dead-on. Use the lowest ISO setting you can. Don't underexpose, which increases digital noise.<br /><br /></p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Tim, not sure what your budget is, but if you don't want to spend a lot of money, a used/refurbished D800/D800E is always an option. While the D810 has a lot of little improvements, IMO the overall difference is not that major from the D800. However, I would put a better, more modern lens in front of it. In particular, a lot of older wide angles will show chromatic aberration on modern DSLRs.</p>

<p>BTW, I assume Tim is aware of where the D810 is made.</p><div>00dI1O-556763584.jpg.6c1a5c3cce9756b191f5fda7899418d9.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I've not used a 28/2.8, but I have been very happy using my 28/2.0 AIS on the three occasions I've rented a D800/D810. My eyes aren't the greatest anymore, so I found manual focusing a bit of annoyance--it's nowhere near as fast or as fun as on my F4, which is great even with my crappy eyes--but the image quality is quite good, at least stopped down to F4 or a bit smaller.</p>

<p>I think people obsessing about ultimate sharpness on the 36MP digital bodies should relax a bit. You'll probably get at least as good a result as you would have shooting fine-grained film back in the day, and really, likely even better. It's not going (for better or worse) to have the same kind of character that medium format would have, but prints that size from a D810 will probably look amazing even from your old manual focus lens. (Edit--you may indeed, as noted above, see a bit of CA near the edges owing to the nature of digital; this can probably be corrected easily in post processing. And from 36 megapixels, you could afford to crop just a bit.)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>16x20 is not particularly large. Wedding and portraits photographers sell them every day, often from DX cameras.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Wedding and portraits are not particular demanding because people don't view them up close as they would landscape photography.</p>

<p>There is something satisfying about a very detailed masterfully printed image that has lots and lots of detail. But to get a great print you need to do a lot more than just push a button.</p>

<p>BTW, large format inkjet gives the very best quality, much better than what you get from a photolab. If you want to make beautiful prints you really need to have your own printer. A good 24" printer is around $2200 or so. With a 24" printer you can print up to 36x24" (3:2 aspect ratio) but then you don't have any borders. Monitors and printers needs to be profiled as well to get the right colors. </p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>My 28/2 AI can resolve down the pixel level (strands of hair, etc) on my D800. But there is some perceived roll-off in the upper frequencies, which actually gives the lens some of its sought-after cinematic character. The 28/2.8 can also be excellent, but be aware that there are significant sample variations that run the range, so it's very important to have a good specimen. The 28/1.8G is sharp, but a bit clinical. It is relatively affordable though. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have a D800E since almost three years ago. IMO the D800 and D800E are 99% the same camera, and Nikon wisely makes no such distinction any more in the D810 cycle:<br>

http://www.photo.net/equipment/nikon/D800/d800-vs-d800e-which-to-choose/</p>

<p>In these days, you can probably get a used D800 or around $1500. If I were you, I would save some money on the body and get a modern wide angle lens. The technologies to make wide angles have chanced quite a bit since 20, 30 years ago.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Throwing in my recommendation for the 28/2, stopped down a little when used on a D800/810. At least as good at the same stop as the 28/2.8AIS I had, and generally a better value. I like the older metal focusing ring AI converted ones best, all are supposed to be multicoated. </p>

<p>I am also enjoying the older 35/2 O.C. on my D810. I don't think the 35/2's get the respect they deserve.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The 28/2.8 Ais is known to have sample variation. If you've got a good one, the next step is to rent a D810(or D800/E) and run your own tests. That's the only way you can know if the camera and lens will deliver what you need.<br>

I have a 28/2.8 Ais(and D800/E) currently, also a Zeiss ZF 28/2. I'd pick my Zeiss for higher resolution any day over my copy of the Nikon 28, except maybe in the extreme close up range where the Nikon is pretty good.. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I print ~13"x18" at home (A3+ size) with a good printer and good quality media. A good processed file from my D700 holds up easily, also when viewed from close distances (and I usually use AiS lenses too). I doubt whether you really need to jump to a D810 to get good quality 16*20 prints. That said, $1500 for a D800 is a really nice price...</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>If you really want medium format quality, I agree with what Wouter said early on after just shooting medium format rather than debating which DSLR. I was shooting landscapes with a Mamiya C330 and making 16x20 and larger 30 years ago. You can pick up a 330 and probably three lenses for $1,000 or less now. You can do the same with Mamiya or Bronica SLR systems, at least in 645 if not a Bronica SQ series. And for the $3,000 you would spend on the body alone for a D810 you can buy a used Hasselblad and a lens or two.<br /><br /></p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with shooting film in 2015 is not camera and lens cost; they are dirt cheap now. Even thought I could tolerate

the quality, a roll of 35mm slide film is over $30 after processing. If you need to deal with any volume, shooting medium

format film is not going to be cheap, and any scanning will be extra pain.

 

The most cost effective approach is to get used higher end DSLRs from 2-4 years ago; someone else takes the huge initial price decline while the quality is still fairly recent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...