The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Looking for a 24-28 prime.

Jérôme.E

Member
Hi all,

I'm looking for a 24-28 mm prime (21mm why not) for "walking-urban-handheld architecture" kind of shooting. It would fit onto a D810. My only interest for the lens is to be compact and good at F8-f11 (good corners). A shift one would be awesome but as far as I know, old PC aren't good with D810 (I already have the 19 & 24 PCE, too big for the use I'm looking for. I had the 35 pc ais but it was poor at corners)
I may go manual lens. Second hand is ok for me, and cheap why not :D !
I have a fuji XT2 and wanted first to invest in a 10-24mm but even if it is a good camera, I find that especially the infinity plans lack of something (a kind of "organic" something, some amplitude, I don't know how to explain it exactly in English) and can't rival with the D810 files for sure.

So voilà I ask you folks, may be you could help me with your experience before I loose some times searching (good) infos into the web.

Thanks in advance.

Jérôme
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
The older 24/2.8 AF-D while not stellar in the corners wide open, gets so by f5.6. Unfortunately the 28/2.8 AF-D was a POS and surpassed by even zooms of that day -- but the manual focus 28/2.8 AI-S is another stellar smallish prime by the time it's stopped down a few. The new 1.8G's in both are purportedly excellent, though physically larger and I don't have personal experience with either.

FWIW, my goto street/travel/walk-around prime is my older version 28/1.4 ASPH --- a great all-around lens and while larger than the old 2.8 versions mentioned above, not much bigger than the current 1.8 versions. Instead of a 24, I carry the 18/2.8D as my wider prime option -- enough wider you can fit an entire room in the frame. It is tiny and very well built, not great at 2.8 and not what we'd call excellent corners even at f8, but totally usable given the width.

Final thought... IMHO, perfect corner sharpness is over-rated, the central 2/3rds is where 98% of the magic happens ;)
 

Jérôme.E

Member
Thanks Jack for your feedback.

I've already red some posts from you about the 28 1.4 and how you like it.
I've seen it on stores years ago but don't remember the size exactly, I have to check. The price seems high however.

I understand your final thought... I don't need perfect ones but good (no smearing) is a must for the images I want to produce with this combo.

Any insight about the zeiss zf 25 2,8 ? I've always liked the zeiss render.

Jérôme
 

rayyan

Well-known member
I used to have the ZF 25/2.8 in my ' mature ' days.

Using it on the D 700, I found it to be super. Typical Zeiss rendering. And close focussing to boot.
I foolishly sold it.
 

Frankly

New member
There are no perfect options but I’d pick the old Nikon 24/2 AIS and deal with the purple fringing or any of the Zeiss that you can afford other than the 25/2.8 which suffers from huge focus field curvature issues unless you shoot at f/8. The CV 40/2 and 20/3.5 May look nice but they’re awful, trust me.

Nikon (or others) are dumb not to make a set of decent 2.8 pancake primes in 20-28-40mm. They’d sell a ton, even at $600 per. Everybody wants a good compact walk around lens. Dumb dumb dumb....

A $200 Nikon 24-85g is as sharp as anything and better behaved than all the older lenses. Ugly plastic and full of distortion but dirt cheap, it’s also the best 50mm in Nikon’s line up (which tells you what I think of those).

The 1.4g and 1.8g Nikon primes are pretty good but too large. And the aging 1.4g designs are too expensive for what they are.

I had the 28/1.4e lens and it was exceptional but large, plasticy and expensive. I don’t like the focal length but if they did a similar 35/1.4e I’d buy it in a heartbeat.
 
Last edited:

Jérôme.E

Member
I've just red the same about the zeiss 25 2,8. I don't want to deal with field curvature in urban shooting, I need a "flat" lens, great at infinity and f8 f11. Sure the zeiss seems to get lots of character but not my need.
I had the Zf 28mm but sold it years ago...stupid me.

The 24-85 g VR seems a very nice idea, i did not know that lens, even if I'm not a fan of those plastic stuff. The combo should fit in my Peakdesign shoulder bag, and I could skip 50 1,8 & zf 100. VR is a nice option too, keeping 64 Iso the longer I can.
This is what I want, be light. Sure I'm going to dig in that direction, and moreover C1 has it in the "correction tool".

Many thanks, Frankly, for all the good infos !

Jérôme
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
My own pet peeve runs against zooms for critical street work --- they are never at the focal I expect. And yes, I've tried taping them in place, but for some idiotic reason they just didn't suit that purpose for me. Of course, this is simply *my* issue with them :rolleyes:
 

Frankly

New member
I don't like zooms either but there simply aren't any good small primes for the modern higher resolution Nikons. I've looked at everything and tried many, and while they all work fine for non-critical work, it irks me because I know they know how to make such a lens... I'd accept a slower speed (like f/2.8 or even 3.5) for a compact yet sharp and well-behaved street lens.

Like this wonderful little Voigtlander 40/2 for Nikon – it's such a nice compact "street photographer" package and handles great – except that the bokeh is awful in many situations. And I am not a bokeh snob, even non-photographers will pick up on it. Like nails grating on a chalkboard!

And yes I've tried a lot of old AIS lenses to find one that doesn't have loads of CA and never have found one. Sure, they all work and if you convert everything to B&W then go for it.

I'd pay top dollar for such a lens if they made it and I bet a lot of other people would too!

A pancake lens on a D8xx body is really quite a nice solid but comfortable package, a step up from mirrorless but with a more ergonomic camera.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Bugleone

Well-known member
Frankly....been interested in your posts.......I'm not a Nikon user but the 810 & 850 are more like the digital 'breakthrough' that i've been patiently waiting for.... Are you aware that the 40mm Ultron was updated for latest hi res Nikon bodies very recently including chips? Is that one in your pic as I could not find it on Cameraquest site marked like that, LH40N and with thin focus ring. Also, while probably too long, the new 58 Nokton is claimed as "best performing" 50 "made by any maker".
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I am just building a small lens kit for a F6 which I got recently.

I have the 40CV (which I once got as a small lens for the SL) but fully agree that the bokeh is ugly, so even though the focal length is nice and flexible and the lens small, I dont know if I would buy it again.

I probably end up with 28/1.8G, 50/1.8G (and / or Milvus 50/2.0), and still have 105DC and 180mm.

I also thpught about the zoom options (16-35/4.0 VR for example) but in the end I think I will o for primes.
The 28/1.8 has a good reputation and is a nice compromise between size, speed, price and quality IMO.

For the 50 I prefer the overall IQ I get with the 50 Milvus, but I am not sure yet if I want to give up AF and the small size of the 50/1.8.Maybe there is room for 2 50s......
 

Jérôme.E

Member
Jack, I don't like zoom either. My 24-70 is my most under used lens, just have it because, you know, as a pro photog doing some corporate work, it could help.

If I was looking for an all around classic street lens, I'd never be tempted by a zoom. But as an architecture photographer, when I'm walking in an urban territory, habits are hard to break and I can't stop myself looking up for geometrical and minimal shots, so most of the time if I only get a 24 to 35mm I feel a bit frustrated.
That's why I was looking for a 24-28 to complete my zf100 (and 50 sometimes). But if, as Frankly says, there are no "top of the bill" affordable & light lenses in that range, I'm a bit stuck :(
So now this 24-85 enter the game... not having to change lenses is a + too... hummm need to test it for sure.

I agree with you Frankly, pancakes lenses are missing in the Nikon's line-up.

Thanks both of you for all your feedbacks.

Jérôme
 

Udo

Member
Did you check/consider the Zeiss Distagon ZF 25mm f/2 ? It is definitely worth to try with very low CA, moderate distortion and moderate size.

Regards, Udo
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
As Frankly alluded to, the 4 qualities of excellent performance, light-weight, compact and affordable in a wide prime are indeed a unicorn... It's why I've "settled" for the 18/2.8 as my goto UW, and the older 28/1.4 asph as my goto street prime. The 18 hits the first 3 of 4 pretty hard, and has exc center and "very good" edge IQ at f5.6 & 8. The older 28 asph hits it out of the park on IQ across the frame, and while certainly larger and heavier than a 28/2.8 it is not all that cumbersome and probably less cumbersome than the 24-85 zoom --- but it is nearly as expensive as the newer (even larger) G model. However, my results from it are so consistently good, it is worth every extra gram and dollar to me.

I have to agree that for the money, the 24-85 is a pretty remarkable optic. I don't own one but do own the 24-120 G -- it is quite good all around, especially at the wider to mid range, and focal range per dollar is probably at the pinnacle of lens development, though obviously larger than the 24-85. SO I would say it would fill the bill if you can live with some added distortion and the zoom itself.

The problem I have with the 1.8 G lenses is they really aren't that much smaller than their 1.4 brethren and they are not "inexpensive" by any stretch, though they do seem to be very credible performers optically. Probably worth a look, but I've not felt compelled by any of them...

PS FWIW's: My street/travel contingent are the above 18 and 28's, the 50/1.4G and either the 85/1.4G or the 105/2 DC. I also used to throw my 180/2.8 in the suitcase so I'd have it if something presented, but recently obtained a 70-200/4 VR-G to replace it. And yes, I also own a 24-70 zoom -- nice lens, but I rarely use it. I also owned a 17-35/2.8 -- that lens was excellent in the center 2/3rds at all apertures and focals, but corners never did sharpen up.
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member

whats wrong with the 28/1.8G Nikon?
Like Tim Ashley pointed out a long time ago in his thread about the 1.8/28mm G, it has some field curvature.
And besides the focus ring on the lens feels somewhat loose and too sloppy for accurate manual focus.

Personally I'm fine with the field curvature for my use, but the sloppy focus ring makes the handling feel a bit cheap.
Don't get me wrong, I like it and use it a lot, it's one of my two preferred lenses for a travel-light kit (along with 1.8/85mm G).

https://www.getdpi.com/forum/nikon/38058-got-my-28mm-1-8g-must-have.html#post428457
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/nikon/53781-nikon-travel-world-kit.html#post632044
 

Frankly

New member
Frankly....been interested in your posts.......I'm not a Nikon user but the 810 & 850 are more like the digital 'breakthrough' that i've been patiently waiting for.... Are you aware that the 40mm Ultron was updated for latest hi res Nikon bodies very recently including chips? Is that one in your pic as I could not find it on Cameraquest site marked like that, LH40N and with thin focus ring. Also, while probably too long, the new 58 Nokton is claimed as "best performing" 50 "made by any maker".
Yes I tried the 40/2 version 2 TWICE because I really wanted to like it. I also bought several generations of the the 50/1.8 AI and AIS, the 45/2.8P, the 28/2, 28/2.8, 24/2, 24/2.8, 20VC and have owned all the compact wide-normal primes in AF-D back in the D300/D700 era.

Thus my frustration.

I foolishly sold the 35/2 Milvus I had in favor of another 35/1.4G for a travel project... that was a nice lens, 58mm filter and not too large, clearly better than the more expensive Nikon but manual focus of course.

I bet the 58 Nokton is a good lens, it seems that once they go over 50mm it's easier to make lenses that perform well on DSLRs. But not all... I always wanted the 105/1.8 AIS in the old days but it was horrible on digital... Then again a comparable compact 300/4.5 AIS was just as sharp as my modern 300/2.8 and really quite a nice lens for it's price and size. I think that most of the longer AIS glass is pretty great.

I am just building a small lens kit for a F6 which I got recently.

I have the 40CV (which I once got as a small lens for the SL) but fully agree that the bokeh is ugly, so even though the focal length is nice and flexible and the lens small, I dont know if I would buy it again.

I probably end up with 28/1.8G, 50/1.8G (and / or Milvus 50/2.0), and still have 105DC and 180mm.

I also thpught about the zoom options (16-35/4.0 VR for example) but in the end I think I will o for primes.
The 28/1.8 has a good reputation and is a nice compromise between size, speed, price and quality IMO.

For the 50 I prefer the overall IQ I get with the 50 Milvus, but I am not sure yet if I want to give up AF and the small size of the 50/1.8.Maybe there is room for 2 50s......
Back in the day I carried the National Geographic photographer's kit... a Domke F2 with two Nikon F3hps (with MD4s) and the 24/2, 85/1.4, and 180/2.8. And a Forscher ProBack with a FM body lol. Also had a 35/2 and 55/2.8 Micro, and I made a good living with it. But when I look at tear sheets from that era, especially larger reproductions, they are awful, focus is off, color is weird, distortion is a given, fringing, etc... digital pixel peeping has made us perfectionists.

Film lets you get away with a lot so I'd probably look at bokeh more than anything else. Maybe try a mix of manual and AF lenses? Some of the Zeiss ZF lenses are compact and good performers, I just didn't like the 25/2.8 because of the curvature.

~~~

It's better to be promiscuous with lenses than people ;-p Seriously the market is such you can buy a lens and try it for a while, sell it at a slight loss and try something else. I haven't found the perfect compact wide prime yet but it's been fun looking. And I made some good images with "not the best" lenses that really I have to look at the EXIF data to tell.

With tourist travel coming up for me I will most likely just take one camera and one lens, I am rather fond of the Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4 solo but am considering getting the beastly 35/1.4 Milvus (it's huge). I wouldn't want to carry a set of three or four heavy metal Zeiss lenses but one isn't too bad.

Last year I went to China and took the Nikon 35/1.4G that I complain about above, it made perfectly fine images and having AF was a boon... and you just accept that you have to sacrifice some other aspect. My only compliant then is that for an expensive lens ($1600 new) you shouldn't have to feel that you've compromised.
 

Frankly

New member
As for the Nikon 1.8G primes, I've had the 20, which was excellent and makes images that seem as sharp and 3D as any Zeiss I've tried. I just don't use super wides so I no longer own it.

The 28/1.8g I only had briefly, I thought it was loose, as in physically loose and sloppy. A bad sample I'm sure.

Right now I have a 35/1.8g because it was inexpensive ($400 used) and just small enough to fit into a underwater housing. I've taken it out street shooting and my impression is that it's as sharp or better than the more expensive 35/1.4g but it focuses a bit slower and the bokeh is not as smooth. So it's a great lens if you shoot stopped down but not ideal for low light and wide apertures.

The 50/1.8G is a fine lens, especially for the money, and you have to spend many times more to find anything better. I love my manual focus Zeiss 50mm and it gives that extra bit of pop to the images... and given that 50mm is such a popular lens, it seems like Nikon should make a truly excellent 50mm not an average OK one.

85/1.8g is superb, one of the sharpest and nicest ever, great value. Since the 85/1.4g is also a slow focuser, there isn't much of a difference... I suppose the 1.4 handles flare better so I'm told but how often is it a problem? Bokeh is good, maybe not as good as the 1.4 but again, once you shoot at f/4 it doesn't matter.

Jack mentions the 70-200/4g, I really like that lens too, sharp, fast, compact. Don't waste money on the expensive collar, it doesn't need it. I did portraits with mine and they were excellent, focuses faster than most of the portrait lenses.

More compromises ;-p
 

Jérôme.E

Member
Did you check/consider the Zeiss Distagon ZF 25mm f/2 ? It is definitely worth to try with very low CA, moderate distortion and moderate size.

Regards, Udo
With the zoom 24-85, this is between those two I've to stop my decision.
Advantages : images will pair nicely with the zf 100. Better IQ and very important, great feeling using a well made metal lens.
Cons : No VR to stay more at 64iso, no af (but I don't care that much), no switching btw lenses.

No I'm considering buying a zeiss 50 to have a complete consistant kit :facesmack: ...Choosing Photography equipments is definitely a never ending story, it isn't from lack of trying however !
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Sorry for being late to the party. There's one simple answer to the question: Zeiss

There are many other good lenses, from Nikon and others, but Zeiss delivers consistent qualities that are hard to beat. I had the 21/2.8 and consider re-buying it. It's one of those very few lenses where the rendering, contrast and sharpness don't change between different apertures, and everything looks good always (except for the somewhat complicated distortion, but that isn't visible unless you do architecture with straight lines). It really lives up to the hype. I've tried the 25/2.0 as well. Seems to be fantastic too.
 
Top