Nikon 28mm AIS F2

R

Roughcollie

Member
Local time
11:06 PM
Joined
Mar 1, 2015
Messages
40
I have just purchased a Nikon 28mm AIS F2 lens for my Nikon FM3A, has anybody had experience of this lens,I hopefully will use it for landscape work,it seem a really nice lens and well built.
Any comments will be greatly appreciated.
 
Roughcollie said:
I have just purchased a Nikon 28mm AIS F2 lens for my Nikon FM3A, has anybody had experience of this lens,I hopefully will use it for landscape work,it seem a really nice lens and well built.
Any comments will be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

The Nikkor 28mm f/2 in AI mount is my favorite of all the 28s I've owned. It's an excellent performer from wide open to fully stopped down. The AI-S mount version is very nearly the same, just a few minor changes to the mount.

G
 
Congrats! An excellent lens, especially if you plan to use it for landscape. If I recall correctly, the only difference (and it is truly minor) between your AI version and G's AIS version is the minimum focusing distance .3M (AI) vs .25M (AIS). The 28/2.0 AI (or AIS) is known for near-far sharpness, and for being highly resistant to flare and ghosting.
 
Despite being metal and feeling solid (and looking beautiful) it is a bit fragile. It has a moving (floating?) element inside which can be dislodged. I had one that I had to return because it was nearly sharp but not quite right. The next one is a gem.
 
kxl said:
Congrats! An excellent lens, especially is you plan to use it for landscape. If I recall correctly, the only difference (and it is truly minor) between your AI version and G's AIS version is the minimum focusing distance .3M (AI) vs .25M (AIS). The 28/2.0 AI (or AIS) is known for near-far sharpness, and for being highly resistant to flare and ghosting.
Click to expand...

Just a minor correction: I have the AI version, the OP has purchased the AI-S version.

I know they changed something in the mount between the AI and AI-S versions, materials or some such. The AI version after a certain serial number is compatible with the TC-16a AF teleconverter, but mine is earlier than that. One reference I saw is that they used less expensive materials in the later ones ... No idea on the truth of that.

The one I have is an excellent performer; I'm very happy with it.

G
 
Not sure what else but the AIS version is fully compatible with the FA's program mode where AI is not. My guess is that that was the impetus for the change.

B2 (;->
 
BillBingham2 said:
Not sure what else but the AIS version is fully compatible with the FA's program mode where AI is not. My guess is that that was the impetus for the change.

B2 (;->
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what the "S" in "AI-S" delineated. AI-S lenses have the minimum f/number painted orange to remind you to set the aperture there for the FA (and later) cameras' Shutter speed priority and Program AE modes. From

https://support.nikonusa.com:

The AIs lens was created when the aperture mechanism of the AI lens was changed to allow automatic aperture control, with cameras such as the FA and N2000. This modification means that the aperture increments of the AIS lens can be controlled more precisely by the camera.
You can tell if a lens is AIS when:
  • The minimum aperture (both the main larger and smaller direct read out figures) are marked in orange i.e. F16,
  • A notch has been taken off the rear bayonet mount, above the lens locking notch. This allows certain Nikon cameras to detect if an Ais lens is fitted or not. See images below.
Click to expand...

G
 
How does the 28/2 compare with the 28/2.8 for:

a) Flare and ghosting

b) Sharpness at infinity

The 28/2.8, while very sharp at close range, seems to be "nothing special" at longer distances. Not that it's bad, just nothing special. And I'd like better freedom from flare and ghosting. I wonder if the 28/2 meets those needs?
 
Some people prefer the 28/f2.8 because it has a little less lens flare than the f/2 and is a bit lighter. Performance-wise, there's not much difference.

> The 28/2.8, while very sharp at close range, seems to be "nothing special" at longer distances.

Not sure why a lens needs to be add something "special". It's a brilliant lens, super sharp, superb build quality, what more do you expect?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom