Nikon 20 f/2.8 AF-D lens.

[Russ - SVP]

Hello

Just curious as to what the popular consensus on this lens is? User reviews and opinions.

Thank you.

 

[Nitroplait]

Excellent, but I prefer the much smaller 20/3.5 if AF isn't needed.

Haven't tried all, but it is my impression that all Nikon 20mm's from the Ai era and forward are very good. Possibly also from before Ai, but I haven't looked into those.

 

[Dennis-B]

Used carefully, it's a great lens. I have one and it stays in my bag when I want to use a lighter-weight lens. As with most lenses wider than 28mm, you have to be cautious about off-axis distortion, which grows the wider the lens gets. Sometimes you have to live with it.

The 20 and 24 are both lenses which I use a lot, and I've carried them for over 25 years. I look at them in the same manner as the 50mm f/1.4D, absolutely necessary.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

Excellent, but I prefer the much smaller 20/3.5 if AF isn't needed.

+1. The pre-AF versions also have a 52mm filter thread which makes it easy(er) to mount in reverse.

The value of AF is somewhat dubious on a lens this wide but does come in handy when you're close to your subject, especially in low light.

 

[Russ - SVP]

Thank you for the replies. I'm assuming that it has to be stopped down a stop or two for decent results? I wasn't aware that the manual focus version was smaller. I find the auto-focus version to be quite compact. I just acquired it, and looking to give it a test drive on my digi rig (Nikon D780). I'm loving the 35 f/2 AF-D lens. The newer "G" primes are as big as some zooms. :-(