28mm winners on f-mount

[pierods]

Hello fellow photographers,

My favorite focal length being 28mm, and my favorite mount being the f mount, can you point me to what you think are best performers?

They don’t have to be nikon and they don’t have to be expensive, just what gave you very good results.

I don’t care about the famous bokeh, sharpness is more important to me: my 50mm f1.8 D, 50 euro, has consistently outperformed my 50mm f1.4G, 300+ euro.

 

[George Mann]

Which camera body are you using?

 

[Besk]

Most of my photography with 35mm is landscape. The last model of the Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 AIS has a good reputation for that use. But I have never tested it against any other 28mm lens.

A 28mm Leica R lens - IF it can be adapted to the f mount - could possibly be better.

 

[pierods]

Which camera body are you using?

f100 and f80

 

[skahde]

I tested the 2/28 in a rather early scalloped NC-incarnation against an 2.8/28 AIs (all AIs are CRC with 8/8 configuration and 0.2 m close focus btw.) and the AFS 1.8/28 mm on a D800E as the testbed.
The latest AFS was the greatest with the 2.8/28 AIs a very close second and the older 2/28 NC lagging behind a little with more spherical abberation and coma at all distances. It's an often made misconception that CRC in The AIs-lens is for better close-up performance: Yes and no. It allows for optimal correction at infinity too as there aren't compromises to be made between near and far performance, the floating elements correct for the change in subject distance at both ends.

In practice and on film I nevertheless liked the 2/28 NC a lot especially when shooting against the sun and used it for many years. For highest resolution I would pick the AFS for your cameras.

 

[skahde]

A 28mm Leica R lens - IF it can be adapted to the f mount - could possibly be better.

I remember reading a test back in the day where the Elmarit and Nikkor AIs ended up together on the podestal and a step ahead of their competition from almost everyone making a 2.8/28 in the early eighties. I never shot the Elmarit but I doubt there is much to win in chosing it over the Nikkor AIs, the 2.8/28 AIs really is one of the outstanding lenses in Nikons lineup from that era.

 

[George Mann]

The latest AFS was the greatest with the 2.8/28 AIs a very close second.

Was this with the Ai-S being tested at infinity?

 

[rulnacco]

I have the 28/F2 AIS, and for my purposes it's quite good. I have read repeatedly that the 2.8 AIS version that focuses down to 0.3 meters (IIRC--it's the eight-element with CRC) is allegedly one of Nikon's sharpest ever manual focus lenses. Haven't been able to try it myself.

 

[skahde]

Was this with the Ai-S being tested at infinity?

There was a difference in performance with the AFS depending on how close to infinity you got but the general trend prevailed at all distances. A small dip in performance about two thirds out from the center into the field of the frame was also noted but again not by much. The AIs in comparison behaved rather unobtrusive at all distances showing more or less the same behaviour, something I really learned to like about certain lenses: it reduces the photographers mental load as you can forget about them and just apply the general rules of the craft. I still own a 2.8/28 AIs this being one reason.

 

[skahde]

I have the 28/F2 AIS, and for my purposes it's quite good. I have read repeatedly that the 2.8 AIS version that focuses down to 0.3 meters (IIRC--it's the eight-element with CRC)

According to photosynthesis.co.nz only one AIs-version exists and it has 0.2 m closest focus. The older AI-version is different: 7/7 elements/lenses, no CRC and that one has 0.3 m closest focus, I also have a copy of this and nobody would complain owning it didn't we have the comparison to the AIs. I suppose at one point the rules of thumb "Look for the AIs-Version!" and "It has 0.2 m closest focus!" got mixed into "Look for the AIs-version with 0.2 m closest focus" which afaik describes the only 2.8/28 AIs ever in existence.

 

[brbo]

I remember reading a test back in the day where the Elmarit and Nikkor AIs ended up together on the podestal and a step ahead of their competition from almost everyone making a 2.8/28 in the early eighties. I never shot the Elmarit but I doubt there is much to win in chosing it over the Nikkor AIs, the 2.8/28 AIs really is one of the outstanding lenses in Nikons lineup from that era.

Elmarit-R 2.8/28 apparently does quite well against Zeiss Distagon 2/28 (and, unsurprisingly, against Nikkor 28/2.8D that never was considered to be any more than adequate).

I've heard people saying that Nikkor 2.8/28 AIS is at least as good as Distagon 2/28 at infinity (a stop slower, but quite a bit smaller).

 

[skahde]

I remember reading a comparison before buying my current copy of the Nikkor 2.8/28 AIs... found it. It was a video.

 

[rulnacco]

According to photosynthesis.co.nz only one AIs-version exists and it has 0.2 m closest focus.

Yeah, out of curiosity I looked it up, and you're right about the closest focusing distance. Ken Rockwell (yeah, I know) raved in particular about the AIS version, pointing out that it was significantly upgraded from the AI with 8 elements and CRC. So you are totally right: just get the AIS version and be done with it!

(That version today goes for a pretty penny compared to a lot of other AIS Nikkors, its reputation is apparently rather well known.)

 

[Sirius Glass]

Tameron 28mm to 300mm f/3.5
PC-NIKKOR 28mm f/3.5 The Nikon 28mm f/3.5 PC is a purely mechanical manual-focus perspective correction (PC) lens for film and FX digital cameras. It works on DX cameras, too.

 

[jimjm]

I've had the 28/2.8 AI-S for awhile now, replacing an AI version that was significantly inferior. The AIS version is much better and one of my favorite Nikkors.
Of course, lenses are subject to individual sample variation but this seems to be the consensus.
I'd suspect the Zeiss is also very good, albeit a bit larger and probably much more expensive.

 

[Chuck1]

Komura can be nice

 

[tom43]

Zeiss Otus 28mm ZF.2 ist for sure optically the best 28mm for Nikon F mount.

 

[Paul Howell]

Well if money is not an issue, for a F100 that takes G lens, the Sigma 28mm 1.4 art lens, sharp wide to F16, other wise all of the Nikon 28,, with modern coatings, are hard to beat. I have a couple including a E in AI mount that is sharp in the mid range, not quite wide open at 2.8, downside is the coatings are not as good as the pro level lens.

 

[tomkatf]

A Nikkor 28/2 in several versions has been my go to "normal" lens for 50yrs. I love them all...

 

[benveniste]

I've used the following 28mm lenses on an F100 (in increasing subjective ranking):

• 28mm f/2.8 AF -- This lens used the "economy" formula of the 28mm f/2.8E and it showed.
• 28mm f/2.8 AF-D -- An improvement over the AF, but the edges and corners are both weak and show astigmatism.
• 28mm f/2.8 AI-S -- Quite usable.
• Sigma 28mm f/1.8 -- I bought this with the mistaken assumption that the then-to-be-introduced D200 would not meter with non-CPU lenses. It focuses more closely than the 28mm f/2.8 and is just as sharp from f/2.8 and smaller. Manual focus was a mixed bag -- focus feel was better than the f/2.8 AF-Nikkors, but the clutch mechanism was awkward. It's too large a lens, had compatibility issues, and, like many Sigma lenses of the era, quality control was a bit spotty.
• 28mm f/2 (early AI-converted and AI) -- The pre-AI version has a warmish cast, but overall I prefer this lens to the AI-s except at close-up distances.
• 28mm f/1.8G -- While I still have the pre-AI f/2 (inquiries welcome) I settled on this one. I has its tradeoffs, but I couldn't justify $1000+ for a 28mm lens even as a DX "normal" prime.

Note that both the 28mm f/1.4E nor the Sigma 28mm f/1.4 Art use electronic aperture control and can only be used wide open on an F100.

 

[George Mann]

Since the OP is using film, I recommend the Nikkor 28mm f3.5 Ai-S as a small, light and affordable alternative.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello fellow photographers,

My favorite focal length being 28mm, and my favorite mount being the f mount, can you point me to what you think are best performers?

They don’t have to be nikon and they don’t have to be expensive, just what gave you very good results.

I don’t care about the famous bokeh, sharpness is more important to me: my 50mm f1.8 D, 50 euro, has consistently outperformed my 50mm f1.4G, 300+ euro.

Nikon28mm/f/2.8

 

[reddesert]

I have used the 28/3.5 (both AI and non-AI versions I think, there is an optical design change at some point) and been happy with the results.

We haven't talked about favorite f-stops. I think my favorite f-stop is f/5.6, especially if we're not talking about super-fast lenses. I think a lot of lenses are good at f/5.6, so I worry about test results less.

 

[George Mann]

We haven't talked about favorite f-stops. I think my favorite f-stop is f/5.6, especially if we're not talking about super-fast lenses. I think a lot of lenses are good at f/5.6, so I worry about test results less.

My Nikkors perform best @ f/8.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

My Nikkors perform best @ f/8.

The optical-quality sweet spot is around f/5.6-8 for most 35mm lenses and around f/8-11 for most medium-format lenses. Wider apertures give more resolution but don't reduce lens aberrations very well. Smaller apertures close to eliminate lens aberrations, but reduce resolution due to increasing diffraction.