Nikkor 24mm f2 AIS or Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AIS

[scorpius73]

If you had the choice between the two lenses. Which would you prefer? Sure you get the extra stop and wider angle with the 24mm. But from what I hear you get better image quality with the 28mm f2.8. I keep reading it's Nikon's sharpest wide angle lens.
I think I would use it for travel, architecture and parades. Just wondering. Anyone have experience with both?

 

[semilog]

I find 28mm a very hard FL to shoot well. Sort of the opposite of a sweet spot. For me, 35mm or 24mm are better. Of course, David Alan Harvey has used the 28mm for most of his wonderful corpus of work -- so who am I to say that 28mm is the "wrong" lens?

Buy the lens that provides a viewpoint that *you* favor.

 

[lawrence]

I have both and they're both great. The 28mm f2.8 is, as you say, a legendary lens -- that's the version that focuses to 0.2 meters (just under 0.7 feet). The 24mm is good but the out-of-focus areas are rather strange if you shoot at wide apertures. The build quality of both is superb. I can send you links to photos taken with each if you like although whether you can tell much from web images is debatable.

 

[lawrence]

PS. Forgot to say that the 28mm is easier to focus than the 24mm using the split image, even though the 24mm is faster.

 

[Steve Bellayr]

What about the 24mm f2.8 Ai-S. Is the extra money for one stop worth it? If you are photographing out of doors daylight...probably not. But, are you speaking of analog with full frame or digital with the cropped factor? It makes a difference in that case.

 

[scorpius73]

lawrence
I have been looking through Flickr at images. Truth is, I have the 24mm f2. I'm just wondering how much better the 28mm f2.8 is? I think we have all been there with second guessing image quality of our gear.

Steve Bellayr
I will be using the lens on analog cameras pretty much (Nikon FM3A and FE2). Occasionally on a D200. For low light, I have my Rangefinders.

 

[Ranchu]

I'm not much for 28mm, but I've used the 28mm f2 ais on digital and it's a very good lens for that.

 

[not_in_good_order]

Based on Bjørn Rørslett's reviews, I'd go with the 28 2.8 AIS. I'm a big fan of the 24 2.8 AIS (it's my most used lens), but I don't have any first hand experience with the two lenses you are trying to choose between.

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_wide.html

 

[lawrence]

Recent shot with the 28mm is here

Here is the 24mm. Also very sharp.

But here is an example of the rather strange out of focus rendition of the 24mm (again, the subject is very sharp).

I do think the answer depends on which other lenses you use. The 28mm makes a nice companion to 50mm while the 24mm is good with a 35mm.

 

[mw_uio]

If I were you and willing to spend some extra cash, why not settle for the Zeiss ZF 25mm? $826 @ BH.

Here is a review to wet your appetite, ZF 25 - Nikon 24/2.0
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/zf25mm/index.html.

If not, I would settle for the 28/2.8 as it is a stellar lens. Can't go wrong.

MArk
Quito, EC

 

[dogberryjr]

I chose the 24mm for the extra speed as well as the increased FoV. I don't mind the odd OOF wide open, in fact I like it. I don't think you can miss with either lens.

 

[sepiareverb]

I'd look for the 28/2.0! One of the top 5 Nikkors in my opinion.

 

[Shac]

If you like his reviews check Bjorn's site http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

 

[jonmanjiro]

Except for the Nikkor Ai-S 24mm f2, I've owned/used all the Nikkor Ai-S wides from 20mm to 35mm at some point. For sheer performance, the Nikkor Ai-S 28mm f2.8 is probably the best, so if you like the 28mm FOV you won't be disappointed.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I have the Nikkor 24/2.8 Nikkor-N and AIS, and the 28/2 Nikkor-NC. They are all good. Only the later 28/2.8 used Close-Range-Correction, but all versions of the 24/2.8 and 28/2 have it.

 

[Ronald M]

The 28 2.8 that focuses to .2 meteris the better lens, has close range focus correction and almost no distortion. A brilliant lens. .3 meter close focus is a different lessor lens.

The 24 has the typical Nikon 3% distortion, but is one stop faster.

It comes down to the attributes you value most.

 

[ampguy]

I enjoy the 7 element .3m 28/2.8 non AI. I realized it's not considered a great lens by many reviewers, but seems to work well for me with film, and digital, with the NH2 hood.

 

[Bill58]

What about the 24mm f2.8 Ai-S. Is the extra money for one stop worth it? If you are photographing out of doors daylight...probably not. But, are you speaking of analog with full frame or digital with the cropped factor? It makes a difference in that case.

I agree 100%. I've got the 2.8 version on FILM Nikons and am very happy w/ it. Just use faster film if you need an extra stop. BTW--the 24 makes a better/ deeper snap shooter on the street in hyperfocal setting. No focus-shoot.

 

[jonmanjiro]

For the record ...

The 28 2.8 that focuses to .2 meteris the better lens, has close range focus correction and almost no distortion. A brilliant lens.

This is the Ai-S 28mm f2.8 lens (optical formula is 8 elements in 8 groups). This is the lens the OP is asking about. I agree, its a great lens. One of the best Nikkors ever.

.3 meter close focus is a different lessor lens.

This is the Ai 28mm f2.8 lens (optical formula is 7 elements in 7 groups). This is not the lens the OP is asking about. This lens was discontinued when the Ai-S version was released (in 1983 or thereabouts).

 

[Armoured]

I'm with the poster above, these are quite different fields of view. I personally don't get on well with 28s - it's an in-between length that's not wide enough when I want wide, but (unlike a 35) can't pass for normal length. So you'll have to try them to figure out what works for you.

Another point: you haven't said what you'll be shooting. Comparing lenses without knowing what you want to do with them limits what useful input anyone can provide.