Nikkor compact 20mm 3.5 AIS problem.

[chip j]

My shots at a distance are not sharp. I read that it's curvature- of- field makes it unsuitable for landscapes. I bought the lens new (52mm filter size).

 

[RichardJack]

What f-stop are you using? If I remember correctly it liked f11 for infinity shots. I had that lens and sold it for a 20mm f2.8 AF-D because back in the day my D100 would not meter with it. That was a mistake. The new AF-D was no better at infinity. So, I bought a 20mm f2.8 AIs to see if there was a difference. The only difference was build, sold that. The 20mm f3.5 works great shooting into the sun, the f2.8 versions will give ghost images. Unfortunately there is no cheap way to shoot that focal length with a Nikon. The 17-35mm and 14-24mm zooms are better than the primes, the new AFS 20mm f1.8 & f1.4 are much better but huge and expensive and won't work on a MF body except for the F6. I miss my 20mm f3.5, if you get tired of yours let me know.
This was taken with my 20mm f3.5 AIs with my F3:
http://www.pbase.com/rick_jack/image/91278711/original

 

[chip j]

Yes, that looks OK. I was shooting wide-to-wide-open.

 

[bdial]

Do you know the lens's history? Maybe it had a drop?
Opinions of what "sharp" is vary, but it shouldn't be what one would call soft.
I think it works nicely for landscapes;

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Get the 20/3.5 Nikkor UD. Nikon got that one right the first time.

 

[chip j]

I'd rather get a Voightlander Skopar if I was getting another lens.

 

[wwilliams]

For sharpness, I've always been told that it is the very rare lens that doesn't perform better 2-3 stops down from maximum aperture and before diffraction takes over. I can't think of a reason that maximum aperture would be beneficial in a landscape situation.

 

[chip j]

Dark, rainy day in an old amusement park.

 

[Jerome Lim]

Do you know the lens's history? Maybe it had a drop?
Opinions of what "sharp" is vary, but it shouldn't be what one would call soft.
I think it works nicely for landscapes;

View attachment 182734

What a photograph!!

 

[Jerome Lim]

Get the 20/3.5 Nikkor UD. Nikon got that one right the first time.

+1
I use the same lens on my FM2. Check out these scans!

 

[macfred]

Get the 20/3.5 Nikkor UD. Nikon got that one right the first time.

+2 !

---

I'd rather get a Voightlander Skopar if I was getting another lens.

I bought a used one a few years ago - it was a 'lemon' (sharp in center but unsharp on the left side of the frame even at f/16) and I let it go.

 

[RichardJack]

Very nice images, I never read anything good about that lens (UD) until now. I only avoided it because I wanted to stick with AIs for their better coating and so I could use shutter priority with my FA. When I switched to Nikon from Minolta MF I was disappointed in Nikon's wides, my Minolta Rokkors especially their 21mm f2.8 could not be matched in image performance. Physically it looks just like your UD. Once again, excellent images.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Very nice images, I never read anything good about that lens (UD) until now. I only avoided it because I wanted to stick with AIs for their better coating and so I could use shutter priority with my FA. When I switched to Nikon from Minolta MF I was disappointed in Nikon's wides, my Minolta Rokkors especially their 21mm f2.8 could not be matched in image performance. Physically it looks just like your UD. Once again, excellent images.

The UD has a bit of bloat, and it's a real handful both weight- and angle of view-wise. But I think it's a great early ultrawide lens, I don't use mine all that often but when I do it's always been rewarding. I did a series of photos on Ektachrome 100 P of a friend arc welding with this lens and was very favorably impressed with how it handled the huge contrast in the scenes. This lens on an F/Ftn or Nikkormat is a real boatanchor.

 

[Aristotle80]

Nikkor 20mm f/3.5 AI has been one of my favorite lenses since I got it almost 20 yrs ago. Contrast and color seemed better than a 35mm G series prime I compared with it. Beyond obvious build quality differences the optical compromises made in the '70s seem wiser than the ones made in the last 10 years.