Nikkor 24mm f2.8 AIS

[Griffin]

Does anybody have any experience with this one? A friend of mine gave me her Nikon FG-20. I would like to have a wide angle film shooter. With the 35mm on my Bessa, a 50mm on my MX the 24mm on the Nikon would complete my set!

 

[x-ray]

Great lens. The 24 f2.8, 50 f3.5 micro, 105 f2.5 and 180 f2.8 ED are four of Nikons best ever lenses.

 

[JRG]

"50 f3.5 micro" The 55 f/3.5 Micro, maybe? [Yup, it's a great one!]

 

[willie_901]

My copy of the 24/2.8 AIS lens is very nice. The CRC (close focus) ability is a plus. The optics perform very well with either FX or DX, and of course with film.

The one weak point of this lens is flare. It will flare more than a modern lens wide-angle with more sophisticated coatings. I use the correct Nikkor lens hood, but any hood that doesn't vignette will help.

I enjoy using the lens and it is practical way to get a 35mm field-of-vire on a DX DLSR.

 

[semilog]

It's a good lens. I shot it for many years, and I really like the 24mm FoV.

That said, the 28/2.8, and 20/4 are better, IMO. Word on the web is that the 28/2 is also better, though I haven't used it. The AIS 28's are really among the jewels in Nikon's crown – remarkable performance for the price.

Too bad for me I prefer the 20, 24, and 35mm FL's. :-/

 

[Todd.Hanz]

It's a sharp lens but what I like most is the CRC, close focus.
Nikon FA with 24/2.8

Todd

 

[Vics]

I have one (mine is Ai) and I like it fine, though I'm not a very good shooter at that FL. Very sharp. All of the pics I shot with it were Velvia. Good color transfer, I think.

 

[Rob-F]

24mm is one of my favorite focal lengths in general, and the 24/2.8 AIs is a favorite lens in particular!

 

[shadowfox]

Me too, I'll take 20/3.5 (or 2.8), 24/2.8, and 35/2.8 (the old S-model) any day.

* This is from the AF model.

 

[L. M. Tu]

I love this lens, but then 24mm is my favorite focal length when shooting film. In fact, I got mine, in beautiful condition, from an rff member, for a very good price - around $125 - a couple of years ago.

 

[former member]

One of the all-time greats. The original 24/2.8 was Nikon's first with a floating element for close-range correction.

Wide-open, on the Leica M8 via adapter, AIS version.

 

[Robert Lai]

I have the 24 2.8 AI. It's a good lens if the light is behind you, but it flares like mad whenever a light source is in the frame. It also has noticeable barrel distortion.

I prefer the 20mm 3.5 AIS, which doesn't ever flare, even with the sun directly in the frame.

Wides are not the area where SLRs do well. The wider the lens, the harder SLRs are to focus. They like macro and telephoto. Try an 85 or 105 2.5 on the FG.

The CV 21f/4 would be a nice little lens for your Bessa.

 

[Griffin]

Thanks for the replies all. I expected nothing less form a fangefinder based forum. This lens will be mine in two weeks time.

 

[L. M. Tu]

"Wides are not the area where SLRs do well. The wider the lens, the harder SLRs are to focus."

I don't know about that. I rarely bother to focus wide-angles on any kind of camera, preferring to use zone- or hyperfocal-distance focusing instead.

 

[peterm1]

In terms of angle of view I think 24mm is a good intro to what used to be called "ultra-wide" lenses although they no longer fit that description I suppose. I owned one for a while and used it a bit on a D200 but sold it and bought an AF version of the lens mainly as my eyes are not so good - and the D200 not really optimised for manual focusing. Otherwise I would have preferred the AIS one even if jsut for its wonderful build quality.

Optically they had a good reputation amongst Nikon users being better regarded than the 28mm f2.8 (which itself was still a pretty good lens although not outstanding.) I would still rate this lens as being very good to excellent although not outstanding if that makes sense. It is pretty sharp in the centre when shot wide open but was better when shot stopped to around f5.6.

Like most lenses of this sort I think it has other failings - like CA in the outer parts of the image when shot against bright backgrounds.

Overall its still a pretty fine lens and I would be happy to own one again if I had an MF camera.

 

[Johann Espiritu]

I've had great results from this lens. It produces pleasing contrast on B/W film (I've actually never tried it on color film).

Some samples (more at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/yophoto/ if you do a search)

 

[BillBingham2]

"Wides are not the area where SLRs do well. The wider the lens, the harder SLRs are to focus."

I don't know about that. I rarely bother to focus wide-angles on any kind of camera, preferring to use zone- or hyperfocal-distance focusing instead.

It's true but no reason to shy away from it. I happened to embrace it a bit too much and had wide on my RFs and long on my SLRs, both system Nikon so everything moved the same direction. Much easier to hand in fast moving situations.

The 24/2.8 is a great lens but so it the Nikkor 28/2.8 Ai-S (that version and that version only). I never liked the way my 24 turned heads into american footballs on the far edges of the frame. My 28 does not do that, very low distortion. It focuses closer than the 24, almost macro level, and it's sharp.

While I used to focus my 24 to make sure everything was sharp I too use Zone focusing a lot more after coming back to rangefinders.

B2

 

[former member]

On the Nikon F Photomic "Bullseye".

Kodachrome

Wide-open and close-up.

Panatomic-X, hand-held.

Nikkor-NC 24/2.8. The metal focus ring, Multicoated version.

I probably had the E-Screen in the camera, like a B-Screen with composition lines. I like the E-Screen.

 

[Noserider]

Keep in mind there are two optical versions of this lens, the changes being in the older one having thicker elements and the newer one with thinner elements, presumably with higher index glass. Flare and ghosting characteristics shift between, the older one has less ghosting in backlight but has more apparent flare (which I like) and these are reversed in the newer one, with less flare but more chance of a stronger ghosting in backlight. I prefer the older one with the multicoating, the N.C version or early K version, but I mostly shoot in B&W.

 

[former member]

I have the original Nikkor-N 24/2.8 and the AIS version. I should try both on the M9.