Any Decent Nikon Wide Angles??

[narsuitus]

Any Decent Nikon Wide Angles??

Here are the "decent" prime wide-angle lenses that I have used on my 35mm Nikon SLR film cameras (F, F2, F3, F4, N70/F70, EM):

Back row from left to right

28mm f/4 PC (used primarily for architectural photos)

14mm f/2.8 D auto focus (this is my widest prime and my only auto focus wide-angle prime)

18mm f/3.5 AIS

Front row from left to right

28mm f/2.8 AIS (used primarily for landscapes, street shooting, and theatre)

28mm f/3.5 pre-AI (has BR-2 adapter on front of lens so lens can be attached in reverse position on bellows for close-ups and macro; has BR-3 adapter on rear of lens to allow filters or slide copy unit to be attached to reversed lens)

35mm f/1.4 AIS (this fast wide angle replaced the 35mm f/2 lens that was the first lens I purchased to use on my Nikon F body back in the late 1960s)

16mm f/2.8 (rectangular fisheye)

24mm f/2 AIS


Nikon Wide-Angle Lenses by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[willie_901]

My 24/2.8 was extremely prone to flare and ghosting. I would never buy one again.

I shared this observation in a recent thread and someone commented that all wide angle lens flare therefore the 24/2.8 was fine.

So I will be more accurate. Of all the wide-angle lenses I've used the 24/2.8 AIS had the most egregious susceptibility to flare and ghosting.

As many others mentioned the 28 mm lens is excellent.

 

[Fraser]

I would go proper wide with a 20mm f3.5 pre ai looks great on the Nikon F pair that with a 35mm f2 and a 105mm f2.5.
16fbpicLensNikon by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

 

[huddy]

An early 28/3.5 would go really well with your F and be fairly inexpensive. I think it's hard to beat the 28/2 Nikkors if you want something a bit faster. I'll second x-ray's comment on the 25-50 f/4. What a fantastic lens from wide open, and worth the weight penalty.

 

[Pioneer]

Wow! Take few hours off and this thread took off.

Great ideas. It will take a bit to get through these.

 

[Timmyjoe]

Big fan of the 28mm f2.8 AIS lens, and even bigger fan of the old Nikkor-OC 35mm f2.0, although some don't consider 35mm wide angle.

 

[Pioneer]

The 35mm is a wide angle lens by definition. How some photographers prefer to use it may be a different matter.

 

[p.giannakis]

One more vote for the 28 f/2.8 AIS. I got a damaged one for £5 and it still performs very well.

Here is the thread i started some time ago:
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155944

And here are two pictures i took with this lens.

 

[Santtu Määttänen]

The 35mm is a wide angle lens by definition. How some photographers prefer to use it may be a different matter.

And 50mm is a short telephoto by definition, how people prefer to use it may be a different matter 🙂 There are quite few true normals around for Nikon F mount (I'm not sure there's any, some 45mm and at least one 40mm from Voigtlander).

But in the vain of the thread, that doesn't matter much 🙂

 

[DNG]

Another Vote for the 24mm f/2.8 Ais.... Mine is very sharp, almost "0" distortion, and great contrast. I can use it on my F2 and FM2n...

I just acquired a Nikon 28mm f/3.5 Ai.... I heard that the sharpness is similar to older optical version, (with the larger front element),
but with less flare because of the new optical design that has a smaller front element and design. I haven't shot any film with it yet, but, I think I will be pleased for a slightly less wide than my 24mm.

Flickr Image Gallery for the Nikon 28mm f/3.5 Ai


s-l1600 by Peter Arbib -My General Galleries, on Flickr

 

[enasniearth]

Nikon f era wide angle

Nikon f era wide angle

If you are looking for f period lenses

The 24mm f2.8 was introduced in 1967 , it has a good rep.
The 35mm f1.4 was introduced in 1970 , one of the best , the finder image is very bright , larger aperature makes critical focus easy with the f split image screen .

 

[Pioneer]

If you are looking for f period lenses

The 24mm f2.8 was introduced in 1967 , it has a good rep.
The 35mm f1.4 was introduced in 1970 , one of the best , the finder image is very bright , larger aperature makes critical focus easy with the f split image screen .

Though I wasn't thinking of a faster lens that 35/1.4 certainly looks tempting. Most of the sites I have looked at think it is a very good lens.

 

[giganova]

I had the 20/2.8 AI-S and 24/2.8 AI-S lenses and they were stellar performers!

 

[JChrome]

Though I wasn't thinking of a faster lens that 35/1.4 certainly looks tempting. Most of the sites I have looked at think it is a very good lens.

This is my go to lens for my F3. It's really a stunner.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[narsuitus]

Though I wasn't thinking of a faster lens that 35/1.4 certainly looks tempting. Most of the sites I have looked at think it is a very good lens.

When I replaced my 35mm f/2 with the 35mm f/1.4, I did not expect the f/1.4 to produce better image quality than my f/2 but it did.

 

[BillBingham2]

Though I wasn't thinking of a faster lens that 35/1.4 certainly looks tempting. Most of the sites I have looked at think it is a very good lens.

The early version of the 35/1.4 had a metal focusing ring that would look very at home on an F or F2.

If I remember right the stopped down to f32 which delivered crazy big depth of field.

B2 (;->

 

[kbb]

I'll give you my assessment of how my Nikon wides were(I'm digital now) on film. They do not necessarily 'rate' the same on digital. BTW, I owned and used all of these on film.
20/2.8 AiS: Outstanding, similar to Leica M 21/2.8 Asph on film. I had both lenses at the same time, so that's how I make this outlandish claim. Pronounced wave distortion.
24/2.8 Mk 1: Very good, very good resistance to flare if you get the "C"/"K" multi-coated one.
24/2.8 Mk 2: good sharpness, more flare, lacks excitement compared to the Mk 1.
28/3.5 Mk1: Very good lens, good sharpness in center doesn't get much better when stopped down. Old school design.
28/3.5 Mk2: very contrasty, sharp lens. I got startlingly sharp Kodachromes with this lens.
28/2.8 AiS: Low distortion, sharp detail rendition. Focuses unusually close. Tack sharp wide open, except at infinity. Shows more fuzzing from diffraction at f/11 and f/16 than the other 28's.
28/2: low flare, Very good sharpness except most copies blurry in center wide open. Pronounced barrel distortion, especially close up.
35/2.8 K/Ai (6-element version): Really sharp, low distortion. Good one to get.
35/2 Ai: meh. Sharp at f/4.
35/1.4: Magic hazy overlay wide open, becomes sharp across the frame at f/2.8. Full quality lens from f/2.8 on.
Roland Vink's photosynthesis site has all the versions, including photos and serial numbers. http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html
Sample variation and damage from improper servicing is possible with any of these old Nikon lenses.
Good hunting.

 

[kipkeston]

I'll give you my assessment of how my Nikon wides were(I'm digital now) on film. They do not necessarily 'rate' the same on digital. BTW, I owned and used all of these on film.
20/2.8 AiS: Outstanding, similar to Leica M 21/2.8 Asph on film. I had both lenses at the same time, so that's how I make this outlandish claim. Pronounced wave distortion.
24/2.8 Mk 1: Very good, very good resistance to flare if you get the "C"/"K" multi-coated one.
24/2.8 Mk 2: good sharpness, more flare, lacks excitement compared to the Mk 1.
28/3.5 Mk1: Very good lens, good sharpness in center doesn't get much better when stopped down. Old school design.
28/3.5 Mk2: very contrasty, sharp lens. I got startlingly sharp Kodachromes with this lens.
28/2.8 AiS: Low distortion, sharp detail rendition. Focuses unusually close. Tack sharp wide open, except at infinity. Shows more fuzzing from diffraction at f/11 and f/16 than the other 28's.
28/2: low flare, Very good sharpness except most copies blurry in center wide open. Pronounced barrel distortion, especially close up.
35/2.8 K/Ai (6-element version): Really sharp, low distortion. Good one to get.
35/2 Ai: meh. Sharp at f/4.
35/1.4: Magic hazy overlay wide open, becomes sharp across the frame at f/2.8. Full quality lens from f/2.8 on.
Roland Vink's photosynthesis site has all the versions, including photos and serial numbers. http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html
Sample variation and damage from improper servicing is possible with any of these old Nikon lenses.
Good hunting.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by mk1 and mk2 using the normal convention, i.e. F, C, K, AI, AI-S?

 

[Phil_F_NM]

As has been mentioned, the 28mm f/2.8 AIS is absolutely one of the finest lenses ever made by Nikon but it doesn't fit into the age category of the F you are using. It is one of my go-to lenses with either digital or film and has never disappointed.

That said, if you're wanting to go with a 35mm focal length, the rare-earth 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor-N Auto is fantastic. It has a thorium element and, as you've stated you're into Pentax glass, is a bit like the thorium Super-Multi-Coated 50mm f/1.4 in the way it draws. Just extremely sharp at the plane of focus and it feels like a faster lens when you need to pull more light out of a dark scene.

The ONLY problem with this lens is the busy, sometimes unpleasant out of focus background. The amount of coma the lens has wide open is impressive and lights or specular highlights can become full swallows, trying to fly off the page but that can be fixed by stopping down just a bit. It has a lot of field curvature and you can notice the focus breathing but when it delivers, it really delivers.

Mine is a sample from the early 70's that was AI converted sometime ago by Nikon. I really should shoot with it more. The build quality f this lens is probably the best Nikon ever did.

If you get one with a yellow element, either consider it a nice yellow filter for black and white or expose it to UV for a few hours a day and the yellow will be gone in a week.

Phil Forrest

 

[Pioneer]

Thanks for all your great advice. I am now leaning toward either the 35/1.4 or the 28/3.5. Fortunately for me this is an "I want" at this point, not an "I need." I do have some time to sort it out.