Nikon's 6 worst lenses: corroborate or undermine. Post yours.

[bushwick1234]

Rockwell lists the 6 worst Nikon lenses as follows:
"43-86mm f/3.5 F"
"18mm f/2.8 D AF"
"300mm f/4.5 P"
"24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 G VR"
"35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 AI-s"
"45mm f/2.8 P"
Do you have images that support or undermine Rockwell's affirmation?
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-worst.htm

 

[Ken Ford]

Rockwell. Click bait. Nuff said.

 

[Keith]

A bit like Canon ... KR is effective but not very cool! 😀

The worst lens I own is my plastic 35mm f2 AFD Nikkor ... the only good thing I can say about it is it was cheap.

 

[bushwick1234]

You see Keith, KR says that specific lens is 'superb.' Right, not cool. 🙂

A bit like Canon ... KR is effective but not very cool! 😀

The worst lens I own is my plastic 35mm f2 AFD Nikkor ... the only good thing I can say about it is it was cheap.

 

[wakarimasen]

A bit like Canon ... KR is effective but not very cool! 😀

Cross-thread post bonus there Keith! 😀

 

[bushwick1234]

Also KR needs to make some money. I want to see good shots with the 'bad' lenses.

Rockwell. Click bait. Nuff said.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

The 45mm f2.8P is a Tessar lens. It should be very good.

 

[Timmyjoe]

The worst lens I own is my plastic 35mm f2 AFD Nikkor ... the only good thing I can say about it is it was cheap.

Had the same lens Keith, and never liked it. Was just BLAH!

It got back at me though, it developed fungus and took out an old film body that was stored in the bag with it. Both ended up in the garbage. Miss the film body, not that lens.

 

[jamin-b]

The 45mm f2.8P is a Tessar lens. It should be very good.

It's great and very compact, with a special character.

 

[Archlich]

The article has been there for years yet it didn't help keeping the 45/2.8P's price down. Way to go KR!

 

[jamin-b]

It's great and very compact, with a special character.

A few with the 45mm "pancake":
Aug15_FP4_D_FM3A_16 by Ben Sandler, on Flickr

Sept15_Kodak400_FM3A_Nokt58_26 by Ben Sandler, on Flickr

Sept15_FP4_D_FM3A-8 by Ben Sandler, on Flickr

Aug15_Portra160_FM3A_45mm_36 by Ben Sandler, on Flickr

 

[markus_h_photography]

Who's Ken Rockwell and why should I value his opinion?

 

[mcfingon]

The worst Nikkor I owned was the 50/1.4 AI-S that I had back in the mid-eighties. I expected something better after owning the 50/1.8 E-series, but it wasn't. It was shown on every brochure picture as though Nikon were really proud of it. Particularly wide-open, I thought it was useless! I was so disappointed.

 

[Highway 61]

The AF-Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 is a very bad lens (heavy moustache distorsion, lots of vignetting) : this is something I've experienced myself. Actually this is the same lens as their Serie E 28mm f/2.8.

Strangely enough it isn't in Ken's list.

The Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 isn't good (sharp enough in the center but with below average corners and heavy vignetting).

Other than that, I can't quote any other Nikkors as "bad".

The Zoom-Nikkor 43~86mm f/3.5 gathers a worldwide reputation of being terrible actually, but I've never used it, nor seen photos taken with it.

 

[Waus]

Had a 28-85mm AI-s that wasn't good/sharp and a bad (2nd hand)copy of a 50mm 1,4 AI-but traded it for another 50mm 1.4-which is quite sharp wide open...

 

[Noserider]

Yes the AF-Niikor 28mm was a stinker. The old H or H.C 28mm f/3.5 has a certain charm; I've never pursued the 'improved' version but the old one looks good filtered in bright light.
In complete opposite the New Improved version of the 43-86mm is a very good lens and the more pronounced distortion from pincushion to barrel as you zoom can be a very useful tool.
The oldest non mulitcoating has challenges....
Oh and lots of 50mm 1.4 are stinkers lots of sample variation as they say. Often a slight retorquing of the the element groups could improve a lens.
AF 35mm f/2 is a stinker especially the plastic ring one. Super annoying since the MF Ais version is a very good lens you'd think with the New Autofocus it would be as good but its not.
The 55mm f/2.8 Micro is a turd for sure. The very worst in poor design; overly large helicoids needing lots of grease that always migrated to the aperture blades. Eventually the lubricant would dry up and seize. i laughed in peoples faces when they asked if their lens can be repaired. You can but why? Go buy a 55 f/3.5 Ais Micro (or even the old F version) for pennies and use the 2.8 as a print flattener (you kids know what the fiber prints do after they dry right).

 

[markus_h_photography]

Had a 28-85mm AI-s that wasn't good/sharp and a bad (2nd hand)copy of a 50mm 1,4 AI-but traded it for another 50mm 1.4-which is quite sharp wide open...

Maybe Ken's samples which he "tested" for 5 minutes might have just been bad examples... 🙄

 

[Highway 61]

The 55mm f/2.8 Micro is a turd for sure. The very worst in poor design; overly large helicoids needing lots of grease that always migrated to the aperture blades. Eventually the lubricant would dry up and seize. i laughed in peoples faces when they asked if their lens can be repaired. You can but why? Go buy a 55 f/3.5 Ais Micro (or even the old F version) for pennies and use the 2.8 as a print flattener (you kids know what the fiber prints do after they dry right).

I have a Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 since 1987 and the helical grease has never migrated to the aperture blades. I've been lucky.
I have seen one like this, and I could fix it for the unfortunate friend (there is a tutorial online and this isn't very difficult, it takes roughly two hours with basic tools and solvents).

Some people claim the Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 is a better lens : well, I cannot see how anything could be better than my f/2.8. It's just sharp as hell.

I agree that there is a large amount of sample variation factor within the Nikkors crowd.

 

[sevo]

Some people claim the Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 is a better lens : well, I cannot see how anything could be better than my f/2.8. It's just sharp as hell.

I have both. The CRC on the f/2.8 makes it a less good choice on extension bellows and rings (to get into the sweet spot of the CRC with an extension inserted, you'd have to rack it out full, but that opens a gap between operation with and without). Apart from that, it is on a par, at 2/3 stop more speed.

 

[dave lackey]

Rockwell lists the 6 worst Nikon lenses as follows:
"43-86mm f/3.5 F"
"18mm f/2.8 D AF"
"300mm f/4.5 P"
"24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 G VR"
"35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 AI-s"
"45mm f/2.8 P"
Do you have images that support or undermine Rockwell's affirmation?
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-worst.htm

I can not disagree more about the excellent 45 2.8 P.😡

I don't care about KR. If a photographer cannot make decent images with a lens, perhaps the photographer is the problem.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148373&highlight=FM3a