24mm or 28mm 2.8 MF AIS?

[gabri]

Hi all,

 

it's time for me to get a prime manual focus wideangle lens for my F3.

 

My question is: which one should I get between 24 & 28mm 2.8 Ais?

 

I mainly shoot street photography...

 

Thanks for your time!

 

Gabriele

[tristanlaing]

The 28mm AIS (NOT ai, pre ai, af, af-d, or E) is famed as the sharpest, most distortion free wide angle prime nikon has ever built. But, the 24mm is wider. It's really a matter of preference. Borrow them, or borrow a 24-X zoom and see which field of view you prefer.

[frank granovski]

Gabriele, take a look at the Nikon/Nikkor lens evaluations here: http://www.naturfotograf.com - I don't think the 28mm F2.8 is very sharp.

[bruce_rubenstein]

I have the 28/2.8 AIS, and it is a beautiful sharp lens (yes, it's better than the AF-D one by a little).

 

If this is simply a question of getting the 28 or 24 mm, f2.8, AIS lenses, this really depends on which focal length you prefer. I wouldn't make this decision based on technical image differences between the lenses, because thay are both good.

 

For street shooting I would go with the 28.

[jose_angel]

I agree that is matter of personal taste; perhaps the 28 is more "all-purpose" in my opinion... it does for me. Specifically for street photography and candids I would take the 24mm. Could be different for you.

 

Would you like to add more lenses to your bag in a future? A good team could be 20&28mm in the widest angle and reasonably priced. Or perhaps you prefer a moderated 24-35 wide angle combination...

[jose_angel]

If you don`t like to buy more than one wide angle lens, probably you would be better served with a 24mm.

[albert_smith]

As asked, it would be hard to answer your question. The key would be to know what <B><I>other</I></B> lenses you would be using, and where this wide-angle would fall into a kit.<P>

 

As a user of prime lenses myself, the trick for me was to figure out not so much the focal length needed, but what gap in-between the lenses that I could tolerate. It is a balancing act of coverage vesus too many lenses. So, what would you be carrying along with this wide angle?<P>

 

FWIW, I went with the 24mm lens. It works well with two of my mini-travel kits. I use a two-lens combo of a 24mm and 85mm as well as adding the 24mm to my standard 35mm / 105mm kit when I need the wide-angle coverage. You can see the 24mm in action as a street shooting lens (used zone-focused and fired from the hip) in this <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=241776"> FOLDER </a>

, which was made with that 24mm and 85mm kit.<P>

 

FWIW 2... Pick the lens you want. Some site that says one lens is "better" doesn't mean much if you don't need or want that lens. You can't buy a "bad" Nikkor in a prime focal length from the AIS era.

[gabri]

Thanks guys...my other lenses are 50mm and 105mm.

 

Probably it's gonna be the only wideagle, I'm quite sure that three lenses are enough.

[lex_jenkins]

When traveling with my Olympus OM-1 all I've toted have been a:

 

1. 28/2.8 Zuiko

 

2. 50/1.8, 50/1.4 *or* 50/3.5 Zuiko Macro, but never all three

 

3. 75-150/4 Zuiko

 

4. A wee T20 flash.

 

That's it. No filters, nothing unnecessary. If I did carry a filter it would be a polarizer (all of those Zuikos have 49mm threads).

 

I've never felt less than well prepared with that kit.

 

However I'm probably giving it to my niece so I'll have to reassmble an equivalent Nikon kit. Probably my FM2N, and either my 85/2 AI-S or 105/2.5 AI Nikkors, depending on how much weight and space I want to save. Then I'll need a fast normal lens - my 50/2 AI Nikkor is very good but not quite fast enough for some situations. And a 28/2.8 AI-S Nikkor. Again, I'd want lenses that all accept the same filter size. And my SB-10 flash, which is a little larger than a cigarette box.

 

I have 17/3.5 and 24/2.5 Tamron Adaptalls with Nikon and OM mounts. But I don't use them all that often. They're pretty good lenses, maybe a little lacking in contrast, but I just don't often find myself needing such wide lenses. At least not often enough to justify finding more room for larger diameter barrels that require larger diameter filters.

[luis triguez]

Tristan,

 

I think we all agree with the 24. And as you say: 24, 50 and 105 are the best for street shoting.

 

 

Albert,

 

Very, very good Londoner work. Nevertheless I could'n image London but in B & W. :-)<div></div>

[gabri]

Love it Luis

[michaelbrochstein]

When I shot film and used only primes, the (Nikon) 24, 50 and 105 were my standards except for where a long telephoto was needed (rarely for what I usually shot). I think you will be better served by the 24mm. I thought the 28mm wasn't really wide enough.

[todd_phillips1]

I have to agree with most of the posters. The idea with prime lenses of doubling the focal length to the next aquired lens is a good one.

So...24-50-105 is perfect. FWIW, that's my non assignment kit for SLR's when I take a SLR kit. It should cover 95% of your needs.

[larry_miller5]

I agree with Bruce. The 28MM F2.8 AIS is one sharp puppy! I use it along with the MF Nikkor 20MM F2.8 AIS, the MF Nikkor 50MM F1.8 AIS and the Nikkor 70-300M F4-5.6 ED. This combination handles a lot of photo ops and the photo editors have not complained yet regarding sharpness.

[dan_brown14]

Is there an echo in here...?

 

Until I recently went digital, I shot the 24/2; 50/1.4 and 105/1.8 AI-s Nikkors as a 3-lens

kit with an F3hp. Fast, bright, sharp, perfect, IMHO.

[johnny t. le]

I shoot a modest kit: 24/2.8 - 50/1.8 - 105/2.5 on my FM2n. Not the fastest like Dan's collection, but it was more affordable. I had a really really good deal on a 28/2.8, but I held out for the 24/2.8 instead because I wanted to squeeze in the uber fast 35/1.4 for low light photography in the near future.

 

Albert said it best, "It is a balancing act of coverage vesus too many lenses."