Nikkor 24 1.4 vs 28 1.4

[Merkin]

Do you think the new Nikkor 24mm f1.4 lens will make the bottom fall out of the prices of the older yet insanely expensive 28mm 1.4 lens? If so, how long do you think it will take before the 28 is down to a reasonable price on the used market? I would love to have one of those 28's, but the brand new 24 looks like a bargain in comparison.

 

[dogberryjr]

I think it might nick them a bit, but not by much. There simply weren't too many of these lenses made, and people who paid through the nose for them have no motivation to sell them cheap should they decide to sell.

 

[Dante_Stella]

I would guess that the price will drop quite a bit on the 28/1.4.

The used price ran up from $600 to almost $2,000 based on the fact that there was no fast normal for DX Nikons. And then it jumped to $4,000 based on the fact that there was no fast wide-angle lens for the Nikon FX platform. But guess what?

The following will also probably hurt the 28mm, "Noct-Nikkor" heritage notwithstanding:

• It's a little on the loud side.
• There are few, if any, repair parts for it.
• It is dependent on an AF/MF clutch, and that clutch ring is prone to cracking around the mounting screws (see above).
• When Nikon drops screw-drive (and that definitely will be in our lifetime), it won't autofocus.
• 28mm is not "wide" anymore. It was barely "wide" in the popular conception when the lens came out.
• It's very good, but it was not designed for digital (I used one extensively on the D2x, and it had some ragged edges).
• It tends toward front-focus at f/1.4, which is something that presumably will be designed out of the 24/1.4.

 

[NIKON KIU]

I have to disagree with Dante's conclusion, although most of his observations are correct.

The 28mm f1.4 lens has already acheived "Legendery" status, the price will never drop.
There is lots of demand out there around $2500, some sell for more than that!
Ebay example:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-28mm-f-1-...iewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item4a9e80fb06

Then there are those Ebay sellers that ask $4K-$5K!!

I remember when I was waiting because I didn't want to pay a grand, hoping the price would drop...I don't remember how long ago...I am still waiting.

Kiu

 

[jonmanjiro]

My guess is that prices on the 28/1.4 will come down some, but not that much.

I'm not happy about the "G" designation of the new 24/1.4, but I bet its a killer lens regardless. And I'm really tempted :bang:

 

[Dante_Stella]

Twok, somewhere I have a repair estimate from Nikon USA that was stamped "parts no longer available" when I asked for a clutch ring replacement (preventative - and still a Class C repair - ouch!). And they clarified for me that there were no parts in Japan. That was three years ago. When was the last time you did a parts check?

 

[James24]

A 28mm f1.4 was sold on uk ebay for £1021 this week. This is the cheapest I have seen in recent years. It wasn't the best condition lens so it might not be a trend setter.


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Nikon-28mm-F1-4-lens-Very-rare_W0QQitemZ220561425531

I guess the collecters wouldn't have been interested in this one.

 

[Makten]

28mm is not "wide" anymore. It was barely "wide" in the popular conception when the lens came out.

As if a lens gets better the wider it is? I really hope that people aren't that stupid. If 28 mm is what you want, a 24 mm lens won't do it.

 

[Nikon Bob]

As if a lens gets better the wider it is? I really hope that people aren't that stupid. If 28 mm is what you want, a 24 mm lens won't do it.

I don't think it is a matter of people stupidly thinking a lens gets better the wider it is. I think Nikon recognized that the 28mm is not as popular as it once was and that people tend to go much wider these days. That is why the 24mm/1.4 was introduced and not a new version of the 28/1.4. Just a much more salable focal length today. OTH you are right, if you need a 28 a 24 will not do it.

Bob

 

[rxmd]

OTH you are right, if you need a 28 a 24 will not do it.

Actually it might - the difference in focal lengths is there, but not that extreme, and cropping is much easier with digital.

 

[Dante_Stella]

.... If that's stupidity, then yes, people are that stupid. Take a look at basic photography texts today -35mm is now a "semiwide" or "normal" lens in most estimations.

I don't agree with that assessment, but you cannot deny the explosion in FX-capable wideangle Nikon zooms that hit 24mm or under (14-24mm, 16-35mm, 17-35mm, 18-35mm, 20-35mm, 24-70mm). On a DX body, a 24mm f/1.4 is a 35/1.4, which will make a lot of complainers happy.

And actually, considering that it is harder to make fast lenses as the angle gets wider and that the 24mm picks up about 5% in MTF at the center of the frame over the 28mm, it is arguably a better lens. In fact, if you compare the 24mm's numbers to those of the Leica 24/1.4 (assuming the MTF is measured similarly), you can see the market this lens is competing in. It is the update to the 28. All it does is take into account the public's taste for somewhat wider lenses.

I loved the 28's performance, but it was a huge and heavy 42mm lens on my D2x and was a little too wide on my 14n. 28mm represents one of those funky angles of view that are too wide for people, are often too narrow for wide-angle architecture, and are just wide enough that you seriously have to worry about perspective tilt. You're never going to shoot a person with a 24mm, but you get more for the tradeoff.

Dante

As if a lens gets better the wider it is? I really hope that people aren't that stupid. If 28 mm is what you want, a 24 mm lens won't do it.

 

[Nikon Bob]

Actually it might - the difference in focal lengths is there, but not that extreme, and cropping is much easier with digital.

Yea, I suppose you could crop but in my experience there is a big difference between a 28 and a 24, much more than the lousy 4mm would suggest. Again that is just personal, they just feel so different. The 28 is just a wide where the 24 is the break point to ultra wide.

Bob

 

[Nikon Bob]

I think they just want to make more money selling two lenses to one person rather than 1 lens.

For that to be possible they would have to reintroduce the 28/1.4, as selling used 28/1.4s adds nothing to Nikon's pockets.

Bob

 

[rxmd]

You're never going to shoot a person with a 24mm, but you get more for the tradeoff.

Arguably not the best portrait in the world, but even that is possible.

 

[rxmd]

For that to be possible they would have to reintroduce the 28/1.4, as selling used 28/1.4s adds nothing to Nikon's pockets.

But they sold those 28/1.4s already. By not introducing another 28/1.4, they avoid some of the competition with their old used lenses, some people will buy both, and they also still get to sell the remaining spare parts for the 28/1.4s they have lying around because some people will have their old lens repaired rather than buying a new one.

 

[Frank Petronio]

I had a $900 28/1.4 that I used with a D2x and I replaced it with a 35/2 when the 35/2 tested sharper at f/2.

I didn't mind that it doubled in value in about six months.

Now, with modern cameras, I won't buy anything but an AFS lens going forward. And AIS lenses for the older manual cameras are a bargain, so it's only the last 20 years of screw-drive lenses that are going to be the dogs.

I bet that the 28/1.4 plunges like your IRA over the next year or so.

 

[newsgrunt]

sux that it's G but 24 is where w/a begins for me and the 24//1.4 handles really nice. It's kinda large but will balance well on a D700 type body and the images look good. Felt fine on the D3 weight wise. If yer into wide open, close focus, you'll be happy.

 

[Nikon Bob]

But they sold those 28/1.4s already. By not introducing another 28/1.4, they avoid some of the competition with their old used lenses, some people will buy both, and they also still get to sell the remaining spare parts for the 28/1.4s they have lying around because some people will have their old lens repaired rather than buying a new one.

That is right there is no competition because there is no current 28/1.4 in production. If you want both lenses now you have to buy a used 28/1.4 which puts no money in Nikon's pocket. Spare parts are a non issue unless you need them and there are none.

To the Op, I would think that anyone wanting a fast wide to actually use would buy the new 24/1.4 and not the discontinued 28/1.4 simply because the price is/was way too high for the 28, meaning way more than the 24 new. Collectors may still pay huge premiums for the 28 in mint condition. I think over all the price on the 28 should drop. I am not buying either but it will be interesting to see what happens with the 28 price wise.

Bob

 

[Merkin]

for me, I have never done much wide angle shooting. I consider 35mm to be the wide end of normal (it is only as wide angle as 50mm is telephoto), and it is generally as wide as I ever go. I would like to do more wide angle shooting though, and I have been debating for a while whether to get a fast wide angle prime like the 24 1.4 or to get a wide zoom like the 20-35 2.8. Even though I prefer primes, I find myself using zooms almost exclusively these days because each one replaces three or four lenses. my shooting is a decent mix of shallow and deep depth of field, but with a telephoto lens, f2.8 is plenty shallow, and for the times that it isn't shallow enough in the normal range, I have a 50mm f1.8 on hand. Wide angle lenses have a decent bit more depth of field though, so I was thinking that I would like something faster than 2.8 on the wide end. Unfortunately, I get the impression from this thread so far that even if the bottom falls out of the 28, it isnt going to fall out THAT much, so it looks like I will just end up completing my late nineties nikkor zoom trifecta after all. When you think about it, it is kind of a sad state of photographic affairs when a 20-35mm zoom that will go to 2.8 throughout the range is a LOT cheaper than either a fast 24 or a fast 28mm prime.

 

[Dante_Stella]

It's good that people can keep G lenses in perspective. Notwithstanding

• the introduction of dial-controlled aperture 14 years ago,
• the fact that no Nikon-based digital camera needs an aperture ring to operate,
• the utter collapse of the use of film in both the amateur and processional markets,
• the discontinuance of production of manual-focus cameras, and
• the implosion of their market prices,

Nikon should have to explain to professionals that they can't have as good moisture sealing to protect an $8,000 D3x and a $2,200 lens because with an aperture ring, Nikon might be able to sell a few lenses to enthusiasts who haven't upgraded their equipment in more than a decade and are now mysteriously going to jump on a $2000+ lens.

I like using my F3 with old lenses, but the commercial logic of changing to G lenses (manufacturing cost and weather sealing) is undeniable. People who want to shoot old bodies (and the FM3a) are already sufficiently served by millions of AI, AF and AF-s lenses on the market.

Dante