Nikon AF-S 20mm f/1.8G ED /w Nano

12346»

Comments

  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,300Member
    edited August 2015
    Any update with regards to getting your D750 and 24-120mm back Spraynpray? How is the performance? Hopefully your fx purchase samples start treating you right.
    Post edited by kanuck on
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,510Moderator
    @pictureted said: Not the 16-85, the 16-35.

    Oops!

    Yeah, variations are a bummer. I may have had a good 18-105 and a poor 16-85 because The 16-85 should have been better. The extra 2mm at the wide end was useful though.

    @kanuk:

    The D750 is about to go in for a good going over. Apart from the low light boost, FX isn't impressing me yet. The 24-120 is going with it too because anybody on the right hand side of the frame at 24mm looks extreeemely fat - just horrible really, and not fixed by LR. What with that and the way the image jumps all over the place when trying to get accurate focus, I'm not impressed. The 20/1.8 was a nice lens in good light, but the lack of aberrations was not so much of a lack in my example.

    The 35/1.4 Art is very good in good light too but again has aberrations that show in nightscapes.

    I think I'll get an instamatic....



    Always learning.
  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,300Member
    edited August 2015
    Interesting, I guess its fate telling you to stick with what has been working for you. I have heard similar rumblings about the wide end of the 24-120mm lens from others on here and other sites. 24-85mm VR II is a better lens I think throughout the range. I prefer the 24-70 though or even the 35-70 2.8....
    Post edited by kanuck on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    edited August 2015
    ...even the 35-70 2.8....
    If you can find one without haze or delaminated plastic aspherical elements. ;) Way too many people have left those things in hot cars and they have issues. I know the one I purchased second hand did. It is a much more compact lens than the 24-70 though.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,510Moderator
    Interesting, I guess its fate telling you to stick with what has been working for you. I have heard similar rumblings about the wide end of the 24-120mm lens from others on here and other sites. 24-85mm VR II is a better lens I think throughout the range. I prefer the 24-70 though or even the 35-70 2.8....
    I am thinking of swapping it for a 24-70 as it happens. I'd probably go Tamron for the VR. I use my second body with a 70-200 for the long shots so I don't need the 120 anyway.
    ...even the 35-70 2.8....
    If you can find one without haze or delaminated plastic aspherical elements. ;) Way too many people have left those things in hot cars and they have issues. I know the one I purchased second hand did. It is a much more compact lens than the 24-70 though.
    I use 24 too much to go longer on the short end.

    We digress though - back to the 20:

    I'd like to know how Nikon get away with describing it as something special for coma when it isn't really. Perhaps Ironheart's example excepted. That variability does get on my nerves - too much by far between examples of the same lenses.

    Always learning.
  • SnowleopardSnowleopard Posts: 244Member
    So if you already own the AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D, would you sell it and get the new Nikon AF-S 20mm f/1.8G ED /w Nano?
    ||COOLPIX 5000|●|D70|●|D700|●|D810|●|AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED|●|AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D|●|AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D|●|AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G|●|AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D|●|AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED|●|AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED (Silver)|●|AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E III|●|PB-6 Bellows|●|EL-NIKKOR 50mm f/2.8||
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    If I was shooting landscapes, no. If I was shooting wide open, yes.

    I assume it is similar optically to my AIS.
  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,300Member
    edited August 2015
    You are definitely right PB_PM there are a lot of beat up 35-70 lenses out there. I have had 6 samples now over the years and probably only 1 of them could be considered in perfect condition. I find they rack up a lot of dust inside the rear element, the push pull zoom begins to creep and lose its stability, scratches to front element, macro focus ring option breaks, F stop collar loose or damaged, AF motor damaged or about to cease up. Signs of this last one is AF hunting action during focus point lock on and sometimes not focusing at all in Liveview. Again, if you can get a good sample, this lens is gold even on the newer D800 bodies. A good used sample would run anywhere from $180-$250. A beater is in the $120-$160 range, and a piece of crap is usually less than $120. I have never seen a new one. I do know Nikon stopped it's production in 1997 I believe...

    spraynpray the Tamron with VR is nice, it's very sharp and quite light. I was hoping the Nikon was going to follow this design, but released "The Pig" instead. I have tried a few used Tamron samples in my local shop over here. I do find there is a little bit of sample variation especially at the 24mm and 70mm focal ranges. Sure loved the weight difference though..

    WestEndFoto
    , I still enjoy shooting my 20mm AIS as well :)
    Post edited by kanuck on
Sign In or Register to comment.