Nikon 24 mm AIS

[janvanlaethem]

I would like to buy a 24 mm AIS lens for my FM3A and see that Nikon

has two models currently for sale : f2.0 and f2.8.

 

Does anyone have any experience with these lenses ? I shoot mainly

landscapes and architecture, but also low-light scenes, so the extra

stop could come in handy for interior shots. I want the best quality

possible, with no distortion or light fall off at the edges. Is it

worth paying the extra money for the f2.0 version ?

[tim_franklin]

The following is from Simon Stafford's Nikon Compendium<br><br><i>Although it is a

stop faster and uses the CRC system, in my opinion it does not offer the same all round

performance of its slower sibling. If you require the fast maximum aperture, and can

accept the rather soft corner performance and its great susceptibility to flare, then the f/2

lens is an ideal lens for low available light photography.</i><br><br>Unless you're

absolutely wedded to a new lens, why not search out an AI version. With the FM3A there is

no benefit to be had from the AIS type.

[tim_franklin]

Me again!

 

To answer another issue raised, Stafford notes that there is some distortion visible at close

focused distances (specifically with the f/2.8 lens, which I have in AI version and can

confirm there is obvious barrelling).

[Sanford]

I found the 24mm F2.0 AIS to be a real dog - maybe the worst Nikkor I've ever owned.

[luis triguez]

Jan,

 

For many years the 24 2.8 AI is been my "standard" lens.

 

This examples were shoted with an FM in Sensia 200 (with no lens hood)<div></div>

[luis triguez]

This one hand held at 1/15<div></div>

[Matthew Currie]

I recently got a 24/2.8 AI - not an AIS but late enough to have only 3 screws in the mount. It's rapidly becoming one of my favorite lenses, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. Yes, you can detect a little of that typical Nikon barrel distortion, but it's very sharp.

[beau 1664876222]

The 2.8 AIS was my camera's best friend for many years, and while I mostly use the Leica 24 now, a bunch of my favorite pictures were done with the Nikkor. The 2.0 is not as good but brightens the view in a nice way.<div></div>

[boulderjoe]

Wow Beau - That pic is awesome!

 

-Joe

[rustys pics]

Get the 24 2.8. I recently got a used 24 2.0 AIS and re-sold it within 2 weeks. Rarely have I

taken an instant dislike to a lens, but the processed film showed barrel distortion, flare,

and poor color saturation. Nikon should just call this thing the "Nikkor Lensbaby"

 

I suppose I was so disappointed because I've had the superb 28mm 2.0 for years and it's

one of my favorite lenses. The 24mm version barks when the shutter clicks....

So my advice if you need a fast Nikon wide angle is go with the 28 2.0 and leave the 24 at

the pound.

[Robert_Lai]

I've tried the 24 f/2.8 in AI and AIS versions. I ultimately stuck with the AI version only because I like the longer focusing throw on the AI lens.<p>If you're really insistant upon photographing architecture with 35mm film, then I suggest the 28mm f/3.5 PC shift lens. It has low linear distortion compared to the 24mm, and its shifts cancel out any tendency for verticals to converge.

[russ_butner___portland__or]

I have the Nikon 24mm f/2 AI, and love it. It's been great. If you want something much cheaper, but still quite good, look at the Kiron 24mm f/2 lens.

 

Russ

[brian_caldwell]

I have both the f/2 and f/2.8 versions, but only use them when I need a compact lens. Both suffer from color fringing and distortion. For best image quality at 24mm the 17-35/2.8 beats both of these prime lenses by a mile, especially with regard to distortion.

[david_h._hartman]

The 24/2.8 AIS is a bit prone to flare. If you buy a new one

at B&H it will most likely have Super Integrated Coatings (super

multi-coating). Some feel these are very important other dont.

I have two 28/2.0 AIS Nikkors one with one without. These lenses

are very flare and ghost resistant so they are not good lenses

for such a comparison. What I observe is if you can get the 28/2.0(s)

to ghost is the Super IC lens has less colorful ghost (one is all

I can get). Under the same circumstances I can get a trail of

about 15 from my 24/2.8 AI. Now the punch line: I think buying a

24/2.8 AIS new may be worth the extra money to get the Super

Integrated Coatings.<br>

<br>

Im not trying to suggest that you should buy the 28/2.0

over the 24/2.8. 24mm is a very useful focal length. Ive

started two Nikon systems. One with single coated lenses and one

with multi-coated lenses. Both times a bought a 55/3.5 Micro then

a 105/2.5 and then a 24/2.8. If I started again I do the same.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[bill_harris1]

I recently purchased through E/Bay a Nikon 20mm, 2.8 D lens...All I can say it is a fantastic...

[red_buckner]

The 28mm 2.8 AIS is one of Nikon's three best MF lenses: sharp, smooth in use, giving brilliant colors, and flare resistant. I am constantly amazed at what it can do. If 28mm will suit you as much as 24mm, there's no question that this is the lens for you.

[sl attanapola]

I use the 24mm f2.8 AI lense and I think it is really great!

However it has two main problesm:

1.)It flares really easily

2.)Has quite a bit of distortion

[larry_miller5]

<p>What David Hartman said about the Nikkor 28/F2 AIS is so very true. The flare resistance is nil and the sharpness, contrast and color rendition is unbelievable. It kicks the Nikkor 28/F2.8 AIS's butt for near-far sharpness. I would never sell the 28/F2. It's that good. I just don't think Nikon has made an excellent 24 for some reason. I like to use a 20/F2.8 AIS and the 28/F2 AIS to cover wide angle needs (When I'm not using 17-35/F2.8). You might want to consider looking at a 20mm. </p>