borgis_karl_johan

After more than 10 years of frequent use, the 20mm f4,0 AI lens remains my absolute favorite wideangle for

travelling due to its light weight, compactness and great optics!

It used to be very good on film, and on DX format with resulting 30mm focal length it is excellent too. You will

see no significant amount of CA to complain about and did I say sharp? Resistance to flare with the sun in

the image is reasonable but not great. Noticeable barrel distorsion is this lens weakest point.

As for FX performance I do not know yet.

 

This lens to me is Nikons best effort in a 20mm wideangle! The f3,5 successor, though nice and compact,

never attains critical sharpness along the frame edges and in the corners. As for the 2,8 AIS variants-

admittedly that lens of 1984 vintage -once released by Nikon with great hullabaloo- may reach slightly higher

sharpness on slide film once closed down to around f11. Until then slowly diminishing fuzziness in the

corners when stopping down is the name of the game. Also, with my two samples the frontal CRC unit

tended to get unstuck and fall out (!)- well almost. Dismal performance.

 

Well here I have unloaded my wrath of twenty years standing against these two lenses again :-)

 

So congratulations- I do not think -all aspects considered- that Nikon has produced a finer 20mm lens.

Imagine Nikon making a modern equivalent of this classic, as sharp and as compact! Instead of producing

superlative behemoths like the 14-24 mm f2,8 that PJs and studio photographers love but which no dayback

will readily admit.

 

Maybe they could ask Cosina for help again as they did with the likewise excellent pancake 45mm P f2,8

lens? In such a lens AF would be of lesser importance.

 

Karl Johan

Hello everyone,

I am a D200 user for the time being and hanging on among other things for the quality of some DX lenses, namely the 16-

85 mm VR and 12-24 mm Tokina.

 

Still I plan to go back to full format having new and old lenses more suitable to FX.

 

Just for curiosity, has anyone more than fleeting experience with DX lenses on the D700? I know that resolution will be

reduced to 5Mp- for occasional emercency use, will you get "enjoyable" quality?

5Mp with my wifes old Powershot camera isnt that awful - yes I realize that is a relative term.

Cordially

Karl Johan

I used the 105mm f1,8 as a travel lens on slide film with my F4 in the 90s. Sadly, it hit something without my noticing and now the focusing is way too stiff.

 

At maximum aperture it was rather soft suffering from internal flare. I preferred using it in aperture priority mode at f2,8 most of the time. Closed down 1,3 steps it was very sharp though with a little lower contrast which made portraits very pleasing. I always felt it was ahead of the f2,5 lens in performance by about one stop.

Why Nikon in its infinite wisdom chose not to produce a VR version when they upgraded this lens to AF-S will forever remain shrouded in mystery :-) It would have sold like hot cakes, judging from forum clamor at the time. Maybe they were afraid to hurt sales of the (at the time non-VR) f2,8 versions. A mistake IMHO.

Still,

 

I wonder why Nikon does not produce a small range of super-compact AF lenses. Something like the AI(S) 20mm f4,

45mm f2,8 and 100mm E f2,8 of old... Lenses that weigh in at about 200-300 grams capable of going with the

camera into your (big) pocket or backpack. When travelling and doing other things (carrying baby food and the like) a

large AF-S zoom (yes, I have a some of those) may easily tend to just stay behind.

 

With the new FX sensor and its excellent high ASA performance a large maximum aperture becomes less of an

issue. I love my 85 mm f1,4 for portraits, but for general photography it is plain not necessary.

 

Somehow I believe such a range of dedicated supercompact lenses might sell awfully well.

 

Thoughts? Would you buy them?

20mm f4,0 and 85mm AF 1,4 (on DX)

My sample is very good. Dont use it much on DX though as the equivalent focal length of 52,5 mm is rather uninteresting to me. It may come back into its own when Nikon comes out with an affordable FX body.

 

Cordially

 

Karl Johan

I bought an very early sample years ago which turned out to be unsharp on the right side of the image until closed down to f 8/f 11. Probably difference in the focus plane on the right vs left side.

It took Nikon in Sweden six months to come around and exchange the lens. In the end they did.

The replacement lens with a much later serial number turned out to be perfect.

When the 17-35 first became available conventional wisdom had that you must cherrypick this lens to get a good one... I think Bjorn Rorsletts review from those days tells a similar tale.

 

Cordially

 

Karl Johan

No,

it is not obsolete, but it needs stopping down to about f8,0 to perform really well.

 

It is NOT well made, though: I have personally (my bad luck perhaps) owned two samples of this lens in which the front CRC unit tended to work itself out of the lens barrel when focussing! One very early lens bought in 1984 and a much later sample from the mid- 90ties.

 

I prefer the small old f4,0 lens which is great on the D200.

Cordially

Karl Johan

Hi everybody,

 

the 105mm DC lens is known for its focussing problems with the D200- my lens is

unreliable too. No problem exists with film bodies.

Has anyone had a chance to try this otherwise great lens with a D300 or D3 body

to see if the problem has gone away?

 

Cordially

 

Karl

I find that quite a lot of my (family as well as travel) photography is done with a 20mm f4 AI and a 28-50mmf3,5 AIS lens (on a D200). Both lenses are plenty sharp and contrasty while small and a delight to carry along.

 

I simply cannot believe that lenses like this -updated to AF and DX/FX format- would not sell!

 

Cordially

 

Karl Johan

Yet another vote for the 85mm f1,4 AF lens. It is great for portraits wide open and stopped down even if it is a bit long on DX format. The 105mm DC lens has an issue finding correct autofocus with the D200 that makes it difficult to use. Also sharpness - at least with my sample - is somewhat inferior to the 85mm unless stopped down to about f5,6- f8. For me it was a great lens on film but sadly rather unsatisfactory with digital/DX format.

 

Cordially

Karl Johan

Hello Kristin,

 

I use the Tokina lens on a D200. I really like its resolution and contrast, differences to the other lenses including the Nikkor are probably minor.

However, if the sun shines into the lens it will perform dismally, possibly worse than any other lens I have used except for the 70-200 mm VR Nikkor which is also bad, bad, bad in that respect and a very old Sigma 14mm.

 

Cordially

 

Karl Johan

Do you have a favourite Nikon lens that you use regularly in spite of some

serious weakness?

 

Mine would be the 20mm f4,0 lens which is small, very sharp on film and digital

(DX) and well built but suffers from considerable barrel distortion. I did not

really notice until recently that the horizon if near the image border will

become visibly curved (on DX).

 

Another canditate might be the 70- 200 mm VR zoom which is great in every

respect except that flare renders it practically unusable if the sun shines

into the lens barrel.

 

Cordially

Karl Johan

Hello Ross,

 

in my experience the issue with the Tokina is a huge amount of flare-once the sun is in or just outside the image the lens will produce a row of ugly flare spots, some of them very noticeable with a bright greenish-blue hue. Much worse than the 17-35mm lens which is great.

 

Except for that I like and use the Tokina a lot. With my sample sharpness is excellent once closed down one stop with no appreciable unevenness.

For me CA is no large problem, though there is quite a trace of it in the corners.

 

PS. yesterday I went out shooting with an old 80-200 f4,5 MF zoom: there was ugly CA for you (though sharpness was excellent)!

 

Greetings

 

Karl

FWIW, I have owned 2 samples of the 20 mm AIS f2,8 lens and in both(!) the front optical assembly was loose and tended to become unscrewed when focusing. The lens has CRC. Could be tightened with a rubber tip and I never bothered repairing it.

 

Karl Johan

Hello everybody,

 

I still have limited experience with my digital setup. However recently I used the 20mm F4 with my D200 for a 3week trip and can vouch for its quality. Very high resolution and hardly any discernable colour fringing in a very compact package. Also the 28-50mm f3,5 is very good.

A 14mm f3,5 Sigma I bought long ago suffers from terrible color fringing in the edges.

 

Karl Johan

I have mine for two years and can recommend it as much as anyone- great build quality and handling. SHARP. Mechanically and optically I prefer it to the AF- D variants I had before. BUT: the resistance to flare is dismal if the lens -even with the hood on- is pointed anywhere near a light source, even light shining through leaves and the like. Several testers have pointed this out, still it was a huge disappointment and sometimes makes using this lens difficult.

Cheers

Karl

Check the front CRC mechanism before you buy the manual 20 mm f 2,8 lens (dont know about the AF). I ve had TWO of em over the years and in both the front optical unit tended to wear loose and kinda fall out (well I stopped it in time..) :-(

 

Karl Johan

FWIW,I have at different times owned two different AIS 20 mm f 2,8 lenses (one bought brand new, one slightly used) where the front CRC unit worked itself loose completely and more or less fell out... that is workmanship for you..

 

Karl Johan

I had one sample on loan from a shop for a day and ran a test film. Wide open only the central areas of the frame were crisp. Edges were VERY soft. Closed down to f4 everything was fine indeed. I returned it though as the asked price was not right for the quality. Hope this helps.

 

Karl Johan

The Minolta TC-1 if you can find one- I was lucky. Very compact. Great build quality and what an amazing 28 mm lens. Smooth as silk in its color rendition yet sharp. SHARP.

 

Karl Johan

At different times I have owned the AI f4.0, AIS f3.5 and AIS f2,8 20mm lenses (two samples of the last). No AF variants.

Though maybe the weakest optically the f4.0 lens is the one I use regularly now. It is critically sharp right into the corners once stopped down to around f8 and contrast is fine with me. It does seem darkish and at a guess it is a f4.5 lens really. Somewhat prone to flare and ghosting. Being so compact I carry it anywhere.

The f3.5 lens is comparable in size. My sample was not truly sharp in the edges and corners of the image. Therefore I sold it.

The f2.8 lens is better than the f4 lens. But both my samples had loose (CRC I believe) front units which would tend to work their way out of the lens in use! Disconcerting, to say the least.

Just my 5 cents

Karl J

The upscaled image is better and i see the shutter dial, so yes, this is not a Nikkormat. FE-FM series is my guess now.

I had the f3.5 lens for a number of years but found that my sample never was truly sharp in the corners and edges regardless of aperture. I believe this may have been sample variation or maybe the lens was damaged. I now own the F4.0 lens which is very sharp right into the edges. It is more sensitive to flare, though.

 

FWIW, I have also owned two samples of the f2,8 AIS lens which in my experience were sharper than both earlier lenses - if stopped down beyond F5,6. However, in both these lenses the front unit used for CRC wore loose and tended to come unscrewed!