noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
I am thinking of investing in one of Nikon's premium point & shoot pocket cameras, either the 35 Ti or the 28 Ti.
I find it a bit puzzling that Nikon would make two cameras that are so similar and are so close in focal length, given that the maximum aperture of both lenses is f/2.8; Nikon usually has a good reason for everything (back in the era when these cameras were built, at least), so I can't help but wonder what motivated them to design and build two camersa that appear to have so much overlap.
Other than focal length, what is the difference between these two cameras?
This is my central question: Is one clearly better in terms of image quality, durability, build quality or reliability than the other?
These considerations are what will determine which of these two cameras I will choose.
Thanks for your participation, and please - share your thoughts, insights, recommendations and experiences with these cameras.
I find it a bit puzzling that Nikon would make two cameras that are so similar and are so close in focal length, given that the maximum aperture of both lenses is f/2.8; Nikon usually has a good reason for everything (back in the era when these cameras were built, at least), so I can't help but wonder what motivated them to design and build two camersa that appear to have so much overlap.
Other than focal length, what is the difference between these two cameras?
This is my central question: Is one clearly better in terms of image quality, durability, build quality or reliability than the other?
These considerations are what will determine which of these two cameras I will choose.
Thanks for your participation, and please - share your thoughts, insights, recommendations and experiences with these cameras.
Spicy
Well-known
Not sure if you can edit the title now, but you may have a typo....
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I had a Nikon 35Ti in 1996ish. I took it with me on an 8 week holiday in the UK and Europe.
It exasperated me no end throughout the first 1/2 of the trip, to the point where I traded it (and some money) for a second-hand but unused Rollei 35 Classic Platinum at a shop in London.
- too much shutter lag
- no way to set and lock an exposure setting without going to fully manual or taking a reading and then setting EV comp to hold the setting.
- it jammed three times and had to be brought to a service shop
I was never happier than when I'd sold it and had the Rollei 35 to shoot with instead. The Rollei 35's lens was sharper and produced better bokeh as well.
G
It exasperated me no end throughout the first 1/2 of the trip, to the point where I traded it (and some money) for a second-hand but unused Rollei 35 Classic Platinum at a shop in London.
- too much shutter lag
- no way to set and lock an exposure setting without going to fully manual or taking a reading and then setting EV comp to hold the setting.
- it jammed three times and had to be brought to a service shop
I was never happier than when I'd sold it and had the Rollei 35 to shoot with instead. The Rollei 35's lens was sharper and produced better bokeh as well.
G
Pablito
coco frío
Other than the focal length? As a photographer, I would choose based on focal length. Can't see that much else makes any difference even if there may be subtle differences.
To me at least it's not the least bit puzzling that Nikon would have offered these two focal lengths. I see them as quite different, not really close at all.
To be clear, and speaking for myself only, It would make no difference whatsoever to me if, say, the 28mm lens tested slightly better optically than the 35mm lens. I would still choose the 35mm lens since that is consistent with my working method.
kuvvy
Well-known
I agree with Godfrey. I didn't take to it either. Had mine just a month the sold it on. Much preferred the Contax T2
thegman
Veteran
I don't think they are close in focal length, 28mm offers a noticeably 'wide' view, 35mm looks pretty normal. 7mm makes quite a difference there.
maitani
Well-known
i ve been thru a dozen of premium p&s the last years
my top list are in this order:
28ti
Tc1
minilux 40mm
contax t2
my top list are in this order:
28ti
Tc1
minilux 40mm
contax t2
mugent
Well-known
I'm a 35ti user, like it a lot, the focal length is preferable for me.The 28ti can be more expensive. I think it's a matter of preference on the focal length, 28 vs 35 is quite different.
grdglass
Member
Having been an owner, it all depends on focal length of choice. One is not better than the other.
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
Thanks for posting your experiences with the 35 Ti, Godfrey. I have been looking at the Rollei 35 cameras, too. They seem to sell for about half what the 28 and 35 Ti cameras go for; maybe they are a better choice for a pocket camera...
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I've had both, didn't particularly like the 35 due to focal length. I currently have and shoot the 28. Lens quality is impeccable, the readout is great IF one can get along with it, and as my eyesight gets farther away I'm less satisfied. Godfrey's gripe about no AE lock is my main one as well. I tend to use Exposure Compensation, but I'm rarely shooting fast moving stuff so the extra time isn't problematic, but a simple AE lock via the shutter release would be far better in most situations. The flash switch on the front has more options as I recall on the 28 over the 35. Not recalling exactly what's different there, maybe flash off is not an option there on the 35?
My 28Ti has been trouble free (knock wood) for the four years or so I've had it, the lens is wonderfully crisp, the flash is adequate and the metering is impeccable if hard to tweak. Size is the main reason it stays home more often than the Ricoh GR or Contax T3, it is a big fella.
My 28Ti has been trouble free (knock wood) for the four years or so I've had it, the lens is wonderfully crisp, the flash is adequate and the metering is impeccable if hard to tweak. Size is the main reason it stays home more often than the Ricoh GR or Contax T3, it is a big fella.
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
I have them both. Cannot say which has the better optics but they are both great. the only other PS I have had.....and I have had many....which is of a better quality is the Contax T3.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I sold the Classic Platinum some years ago. But my faithful black Rollei 35S, a 1974 vintage camera I've owned for 30 years or so, is still my favorite 35mm compact camera. Just had it CLAed a few months ago too, it's like new again.
Simple, all manual, mechanical. Like the best film cameras ought to be ... ;-)
G
Gary Sandhu
Well-known
28ti. The flash off switch is a lot better-- a switch rather than a pokey thing you have to keep pressed with a fingernail. Both have matrix metering so no exposure compensation on AE mode.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
That's right. And it's the red-eye reduction setting on the front which the 35 does not have.
majid
Fazal Majid
I'd bought a 35Ti in 1995, to replace my Nikon N6006 that was too bulky and mostly gathered dust, and it was my primary shooter for the next 5 years or so, until I got my Canon D30. 28mm vs. 35mm is a matter of personal taste, I would have opted for a 50Ti had Nikon made one.
Image quality on the 35Ti is good, but the dials on top are a gimmick and ergonomics leave to be desired. I sold mine and got a Contax T3, which I much prefer as a compact film shooter.
Image quality on the 35Ti is good, but the dials on top are a gimmick and ergonomics leave to be desired. I sold mine and got a Contax T3, which I much prefer as a compact film shooter.