My opinion about the 'crap' Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AF (non D) lens

[flaviosganzerla]

It may be interesting to some of you...

 

So I finally bought a used Minolta IV scanner, and as people here says the 28mm

f/2.8 AF (non D) lens is the worst 28mm lens Nikon made, I decided to see how

bad it can be. But please, before someone post here saying this is not a good

review or test, it was not intended to be, ok!?

 

I am using this lens for 5 years, 4 of these it was in my camera 80% of the

time, if not more! I think is possible to say I know it a little...

 

Sharpness was never an issue with this lens to my eyes and Photography I do,

except when used past f/13. I learned it the hard way, my lens on my new 055 Pro

+ 029 (at that time) was giving me worst results than when used handheld (?).

After this bad experience, and lots of thinking to discover what was happening,

bad scan, photographer's bad tecnique, bad filters, bad tripod, what could be? I

made some tests and since then, I haven�t used it past f/13.

 

I made a few big enlargements with very good, if not excellent quality with

this lens too, sharpness, contrast, are all very good. Ghost and flare can be a

problem sometimes, but I have never bothered too much about it. The only thing I

really don�t like in this lens is the barrel distortion, but I can live with this.

 

Yesterday I had nothing to do, and the film in my camera was in the middle, so

I picked up my Manfrotto 055+029, my F100 and some lenses to make some 'tests',

one was to see how is the sharpness of the lens from f/2.8 to f/22. The subject

I choose was a house at the other side of the street.

 

Film used was Agfa APX 100 + Rodinal 1:25. I have some slides here with me, but

I develop them only in S�o Paulo (120 miles from here), I have no other

developer with me, so I had to use Rodinal, in fact I will not buy more

chemicals just to make a 'test' like this. Using slide and getting developed

would take at least 20 days too, so...

 

Well, there is no review about this lens all over internet, or at least I

haven�t seen it yet. My conclusion is that I may have a good sample because it

look good to my eyes, in fact, very good. I think images speak for themselves.

By the way, the 'test' was made with a L37c filter in front of the lens,

because it is the way I use it in the streets.<div></div>

[flaviosganzerla]

Here is the central crop at 100%.<div></div>

[flaviosganzerla]

Here is the left side crop at 100%<div></div>

[greg s]

"My conclusion is that I may have a good sample because it look good to my eyes, in fact, very good."

 

So, your conclusion is that the lens is not crap.

[klix]

<i>I am using this lens for 5 years, 4 of these it was in my camera 80% of the time, if not more! I think is possible to say I know it a little... My conclusion is that I may have a good sample because it look good to my eyes, in fact, very good." - Flavio</i>

<p><p>

Well, one would certainly hope that, for your sake, you would reach the conclusion that you did; otherwise, you would have shooting almost nothing else but crap for 4 or 5 years!

<p><p>

[ky2]

Nobody implied it was crap in the first place. it's just that the 28/2.8 AIS version is much better.

[vinh]

I have the 28mm f/2.8 AF-D. I believe the AF-D was actually supposed to be an improvement over the non-D, it includes an additional element. That said, it's an ok lens. If you want 50mm f/1.8 calibre sharpness, you're not going to get it. If you look at the MTF for the 28mm AF, it's performance is pretty flat from wide-open to stopped down, i.e. it doesn't get much better as you stop down, it's average at all apertures.

 

Even more interesting, if you look at the 28-70mm f/2.8's MTF, at 28mm it's about the same as the 28mm prime. So either the zoom is very good, or the prime is pretty mediocre.

[photojim]

I owned a Series E 28/2.8 for awhile, which uses the same optical formula as the AF 28/2.8 non-D. The E is not a bad lens, particularly at middle apertures. It certainly has a poor reputation. It would not surprise me at all if it were the worst Nikon 28mm... but it is not a *bad* 28mm. It is eminently usable, particularly at the middle apertures that people usually use with a 28.

 

I bet the same applies to your lens, too.

 

At f/2.8, your lens and the Series E might be quite unsharp in the corners compared to the other Nikon 28s... but it might still be good enough for most types of usage.

 

The price is certainly right, too!