Choosing a wide angle lens for Nikon FE

[escuta]

Hi Forum,

 

I'm getting back into photography - and film photography specifically - after a long break and I'm looking for a wide angle lens for my Nikon FE. I think I'm settling on a 28mm 2.8 Ai or Ais, as from what I read they're very sharp, don't distort too much and have macro capabilities. Sounds like a good all-rounder (my other lens is a AF f1,8 standard lens which takes good images). I'm looking on the Brazilian market where there's not too much available, but I've found a clean-ish looking Ai model at a good price (for here, anyway: R$580). The description is that the lens is perfect with no mold/fungus and no scratches and that it has been recently serviced, however the front glass looks a little foggy to me. I'll try and attach a picture here - I wonder what you folks think of it?

 

There's another Ais lens for R$140 more that does look newer, but money is a bit tight... There's also a 24mm 2.8 Ai - but more money again and may not be so versatile.

 

Looking forward to hearing your comments

 

All the best!

 

[Dieter Schaefer]

28mm 2.8 Ai or Ais

Big difference between the two with the Ai-S version by far the better option.

[Sandy Vongries]

Suppose it is all about shooting style, but I almost never reach for the 28, its usually the 24 or 20 or even 35. Just out of curiosity I reviewed the shots from a recent trip using a pair of zooms -- checking the focal lengths, I found almost nothing at 28mm I suppose I can blame it on Jean Loup Sieff in my formative years! All comes down to what you need & use for your style. Good luck & have fun with the new lens.

[ben_hutcherson]

I'm a wide angle junky, and I don't currently own a 28mm prime in either of the SLR systems I use(Canon FD and Nikon) although I have zooms covering it. I have a 24mm f/2 and 20mm 2.8 in Canon FD, along with a 24mm 2.8 AI and 20mm 3.5(pre-AI) along with an 18mm 3.5 AI-S on the way in F mount.

 

I've had 28mms and sold them. In all honesty, 28mm and 35mm focal lengths just don't excite me that much. I love the "in your face" perspective distortion of wide angles, and to me a 28mm just doesn't get me there. I don't find that I can really get the effect until I get to 24mm.

 

With that said, only you can decide if it's a lens for you. One of the nice things about AI/AI-s lenses is that if buy one for a reasonable price you can probably resell it at little to no loss or even make a little bit. So, I'd encourage you to at least try.

 

At the same time, I might encourage you to spend a bit more and get a 24mm. To me, 24mm is a more versatile focal length as it can be pressed into "real" wide angle service(albeit without results as dramatic as a wider lens) and is JUST long enough that you can make it work in a lot of situations.

[escuta]

Thanks Dieter, Sandy and Ben. A 24mm is tempting and there is a very nice looking 24mm f2.8 Ai going for R$850. I'll consider it. I googled

Jean Loup Sieff and yes, Serge Gainsbourg's nose and eyelids do get pretty interesting in wide angle. My other camera is Mamiya C330 for which I have a 55mm lens which I think roughly translates to a 30mm lens in the horizontal on a 35mm camera - so perhaps I have the 28mm look well covered...

[escuta]

Here is a picture of the front of the 24mm:

 

[BeBu Lamar]

I think the 28 is the right focal length. I don't know about the foggy problem.

[Wouter Willemse]

Depending on how wide you want to go - the AiS 20mm f/3.5 is a lens I really like, especially close-up (it's not great at infinity). Small, light and usually quite cheap, but obviously a lot wider than a 28mm. I also have a Ai 24mm f/2.8, which is a very solid choice too.

[jose_angel]

If you plan to shoot interiors or narrow streets, I think the 24 is definitely a much better choice. If not, for landscape or general use I`d get the 28, which is at a middle point between the almost standard 35 and the really wide 24. For closer crowds, I prefer the look of a 24, despite of the perspective distortion.

To me, for general use 20mm is simply too wide. But it is just matter of taste.

[rodeo_joe1]

The FE was contemporary with Ai-S lenses, despite not making any use of the "S" modifications. You don't need to stick to Ai lenses, and Ai-S lenses would actually be more in period.

 

R$850 seems quite steep for a 24mm f/2.8 Ai version. That would be just over £200 in UK money; a sum that should easily get you a mint 24mm f/2.8 Ai-S Nikkor. With obviously used-condition ones going for more like £125 - 150 / R$500 - 600.

 

My walk-around lens for quite a while was Tamron's little (for an f/2.8 zoom) 28 - 75. I did occasionally find the 28mm end a bit limiting, but you learn to just step back a bit more or work within its limitations. OTOH the only wideangles I had when I used the FE and F2A were 35 and 24mm. 28mm wasn't different enough from 35mm to bother with, and zooms of that time were big, heavy and not too good image-wise.

 

BTW, the 28mm f/2.8 focusses pretty close, but its by no means a "macro" lens; not unless you reverse it on extension tubes or bellows.

[escuta]

Thanks, it is steep, however if I were to buy a lens at 125 pounds via ebay or something, that equals R$524 and with postage, perhaps R$600. Given that federal taxes in Brazil are levelled at both the item and freight and then state taxes are applied to the after-tax amount of this, I would end up paying around R$1200 or 280 pounds (It's not called the third world for nothing). The used market knows this well and prices are high accordingly, so R$850 is not an unfair price here (and actually reading the comments on the item, i should be able to get it for 800). New speciality goods are often twice as expensive here as well.

 

I've been looking at Flickr pages for photos taken with the 20, 24 and 28mm lenses. I think I'll have most fun with the 24, the 20 leaves me feeling a little queezy. Unfortunately I have to wait a few days before I can purchase it - but if it's gone I'll be happy with the 28mm.

 

Thanks a lot for your help everyone - all the best!

[Gary Naka]

I went with a 24 on the logic of it was the widest lens (at the time) that use the standard 52mm filters.

In my case, I was sometimes shooting in limited space, where my back was literally up against the wall, so the wider the better.

However, many people cannot shoot a 24, because of the wide angle distortion. Keeping the camera level becomes more important to avoid the distortion. For them the 28 would be as wide as they can go. So your choice of the 28 seems good.

 

For me, it is hard to tell about the foggy look on the lens in a picture.

It could simply be dust on the lens, or it could be a problem.

That is the kind of stuff that I want to see in person.

[ben_hutcherson]

I've been looking at Flickr pages for photos taken with the 20, 24 and 28mm lenses. I think I'll have most fun with the 24, the 20 leaves me feeling a little queezy. Unfortunately I have to wait a few days before I can purchase it - but if it's gone I'll be happy with the 28mm.

 

20mm and wider lenses have the ability to be very "powerful" lenses. The results from them can be phenomenal if used to their potential but also a disaster if used wrong.

 

There again, that's where I go back to a 24mm being a great starter wide angle. You can still push it to get the "wide angle" look that so many of us crave, but it can also be used in a pinch for general purpose photography. If you're photographing people, just keep them away from the edges of the frame!

 

As a side note, you may well know this but many folks think about a wide angle as being a lens to "get it all in." In truth, the most compelling uses of them often do just the opposite. The fact that you can get almost on top of something you're photographing not only can cut out foreground clutter but also use the inherent distortion to your advantage.

[jose_angel]

I see the 28mm as a good "one lens only" option... that is, when you want a wider view (than "standard") but you want to carry with just one lens. It has a noticeable wider viewing angle than a 35mm, but still not so wide to look "extreme" like the 24... well, as said, at the end, it`s just matter of each one`s taste.

Personally, I used to carry with a 24 (I currently don`t use small film formats so often), but I also used to have a 35 or 50 at hand. My starter was a 28, but 30+ years later it has far less shots than my other wides. I consider 20mm (and shorter) as some kind of "specialist" lenses.

Edited June 20, 2017 by jose_angel

[Rick Helmke]

My first wideangle lens back in the day was the Nikkor 28/3.5 and it was a revelation. It remains one of my favorite lenses to this day. I've often said that if I were stuck on a deserted island I would want an F2, a 28 and some Tri X.

 

Rick H.

[ShunCheung]

Way back in 1978, I bought a Nikon FE in the same year Nikon introduced that model. At the time I also bought a 24mm/f2.8 AI to go along with it. Earlier I had a 28mm wide angle in another brand, and at least I preferred the wider 24mm focal length, but your mileage may vary.

[rodeo_joe1]

"I've often said that if I were stuck on a deserted island I would want an F2, a 28 and some Tri X."

- Food, water, matches, a dry place to sleep and a stock of distress flares would be top of my list.... followed by a DSLR with 55mm micro lens, a stack of memory cards and a solar-powered battery charger.

 

All the developer, fixer, tank, enlarger, dishes, stock of bromide paper and darkroom-tent might be a bit much to carry.

Edited June 22, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

[escuta]

Took me two months to move on this, but I eventually went for a 28mm 2.8 AiS. Should arrive in a day or two. Thanks for your help here

[Albins images]

Like some wrote above: Me too, I am not too excited about how wide 28mm is, and lived with my 24/2.8 for years using colour slidefilm (Nikon F3T camera most often).

Also used it a lot with short extension rings, for a wide-angle macro approach.

On DSLR, the lens is markedly colour-fringing and weak in the corners .. and my small 20/3.5 does better in that respect!

 

AND: Enjoy your new lens, escuta!

[rick_jack1]

Save your money and go for the AI. I'm sorry I sold mine. The AIs is only sharper at 10' and closer, at infinity they are the same. If money were no option I'd suggest the 28mm f2 AI which is the best 28mm at infinity (except for the 28mm f1.4 AFD and the new AFS models). If your lucky you can find a 28/2 AI for about the same price as a 28/2.8 AIs. It's great for IR work as well, no hot spot.

[escuta]

Proof of the pudding - here's a shot from the first roll of film back: