Nikkor 20mm f4 AI - LENS PERFORMANCE

Hello,

Wondering if someone with enough experience can tell me about the

performance of a Nikkor 20mm f4 AI lens. I need a wide angle lens

for architectural shots. Is this lens a good user or not.

Tks

Ken Rockwell (<a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/20f4.htm">www.kenrockwell.com</a>) has a good review of this lens.

Thanks for the link. A very good lens review!

Bjorn Roslett -- see http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2_PC.html -- doesn't rate it that highly. I respect Roslett much more than Rockwell, who has been accused of posting test results for lenses he's never even touched.

 

That said, not all examples of a given lens perform equally well. And not all users have the same standards. The only way to find out whether a lens you're contemplating buying will do for you is to try it out. You probably won't buy the very lens that Rockwell tested or the one that Roslett may still have.

I have 20/2.8 AF latest version of it. It is sharp and no distorion.

 

Much better in this respect than wide end of the kit lens (I sold it), or wide zoom lens that I have.

 

The only problem with it, that I have, is that it glares a lot when shooting into the sun, or in direction of the sun that will still catch a lot of light. I used it on D70 where it has angle of a 30 mm lens without any lens hood - my mistake.

 

I got a B&W wide angle rubber lens hood for 28mm lens (that is in 35 mm film camera) and it helped a bit. However the hood is too big, and blocks the auto focus assist light produced by D70. That goofs the focusing in low light. I need to remove the hood in order to use the lens in low light - and put it back when shooting outside - too much trouble. I will need to find a better hood for it, or a lens that does not glare that much.

 

The original Nikon hood for 20mm would not be that much help when this lens is on D70, as I need narrower angle hood for 30mm lens that is not that big, (hood for 28mm in film camera would be fine, if not big to block auto focus assisting light).

Antonio,

I have the lens and really enjoy using it. I have been very pleased with the results but I use if only for ourdoor/landscape shooting and have not used if for anything architectural. I purchased mainly because Galen Rowell...a photogrsapher whose work I respect...raved about it and carried it in his bag. Another photographer whose work and books I enjoy is Michael Freeman. He has published numerous books and used the 20 3.5 ai/s lens for many of his shots that included architecture. Are you doing interior, exterior or both? Hope this helps...

 

Wayne

I've had one for three decades. Never done any formal testing but it has impressed me as

being both very sharp and free of distortion. And it's <B><I>tiny</b></i>!

<i>

Bjorn Roslett [...] doesn't rate it that highly.

</i>

 

<p>

For whatever it's worth, the lens listed on Bjorn Rorslett's site is the non-AI version of the 20mm f/4.

<p>

 

<p>

--Bill

</p>

If the price is good, buy it. It's a good little lens but optically it ranks a little below either the large non AI or the tiny AIS 20/3.5. The 20/2.8 is their best. The only practical drawbacks of the 20/4 is the slow speed and the long focus throw. Both make fast accurate focusing a tad more difficult. Performance should be fine.

<i>"For whatever it's worth, the lens listed on Bjorn Rorslett's site is the non-AI version ..."</i><P>

 

Optics are identical in the AI version (which was only produced for about a year). FWIW. :-)<P>

 

This lens was supposedly a favorite of the late Galen Rowell. Some like it a lot, some are less enthusiastic about it. It has a bit of a cult following (or at least it used to) which tended to keep used prices high. The later 20/3.5 AI/AIS version (52mm filter), which replaced the 20/4, is quite a bit more common (produced from 1978-84), and just as good (or better) depending on whose opinion you seek.

 

<P>I think any of the Nikkor 20mm lenses (f/3.5, f/4, f/2.8) will be perfectly adequate for architectural shots. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. I have the f/3.5 version, and have never been dissappointed with it.<div></div>

I also have the 20 f/3.5 ai lens and it's pretty darned good in my book. It makes sharp 8x enlargements and that's good enough for me. A good f/3.5 model is worthy of serious consideration should you come across one at the right price. It's tiny, sharp, and doesn't flare too badly with a light source in the frame. Sorry I can't help you with an opinion of the f/4 model.

I had owned both versions of the lenses: the Nikkor AI 20mm f4.0 and the Nikkor AIS 20mm f3.5 (compact). The results of testing them side by side showed no visible difference in their high sharpness and contrast. Both have very good flare control.

The Nikkor AIS 20mm f2.8 I got later seems to be not worse in its performance.

I agree with Dan Fromm. Trust Bjorn Rorslett's opinion. That boy knows his Nikons. Rockwell? Well that's another story......

<p>Larry, don't know why you have an attitude, but Ken Rockwell is an authority on Nikon equipment NEW & OLD. Besides, Ken's website blows away Bjorn's offering...</p>

<p>As a technician, I've conversed with KR many times, and he can run rings around anybody who claims to know more about Nikon products than him. My bet would be on the engineering mind who's dealt with the pros & equipment in the Hollywood arena, <strong>any day!</strong></p>