relatively wide full frame prime

CouncilmanDoug

No longer a newbie, moving up!
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
335
Reaction score
55
Location
Fl
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
So I'm planning on getting a d600 at some point relatively soon, and I'm happy with all of my lenses on full frame, except I don't have a wide fx lens. I drool over the 24mm 1.4g but it's not anywhere near my price range. I basically want either a 24mm or a 28mm lens. I was debating on getting the 28mm 1.8, but then i got to looking and saw the older 24mm and 28mm af-d primes, and even the ais primes. It always bugs me taking night landscapes with g lenses because of the lack of the infinity focus stop, so if the image quality of any of the older primes is on par with the new 28mm I'd rather go with one of them. Help me spend my money and tell me what I want haha
 
I think it all comes down to what lenses you currently have already, what you expect to get out of the lens (what sorts of shots you currently do), and whether the 4mm difference between 24 and 28 matters a ton to you.
 
I tried 3 copies of the 28 D and all were soft.
 
AF-D F2.8 20mm, a good used copy can be had for US$300 or less. Advantage for this lens is light weight and compactness. Disadvantage is the IQ may not be the best especially for sensors like the 24mp D600. Or may be it's me who doesn't know how to get the best out of it.
Personally I've been using this lens for more than 10 years, starting from its predecessor the Ai-S version. The Ai-S and AF-D versions have the same optics. One manual and one AF. I still use it now and probably won't be looking for a replacement because as a traveler's lens, it's simply great.

Other lens to consider: AF-S F2.8 17-35mm, or the AF-D F2.8 20-35mm ( I tried it and the distortion is worse than the 20mm, at 20mm).

If budget permits, I'd recommend the 17-35. I know a guy who has it and he really likes it.
 
Last edited:
.........If budget permits, I'd recommend the 17-35. I know a guy who has it and he really likes it.

I love mine as well. It's pretty much my go-to lens.

If budget is an issue, you might try looking into an old-school Tokina 17/3.5 SL. Manual focus, no bells & whistles, you can only use it in Aperture or Manual modes, and you can't use the camera to adjust the aperture (you must do it the 'old-fashioned' way... turn the aperture dial on the lens). But I can't see any IQ difference between it and my 17-35/2.8D

Tokina17Post4.jpg



Good, clean copies sell on ebay for $200.
 
I feel like 17mm is really wider than what I need, I'm leaning towards a 24mm 2.8 af-d.
 
Last edited:
I feel like 17mm is really wider than what I need, I'm leaning towards a 24mm 2.8 af-d.

Based on my research, that lens is soft in the corners. One of Nikon's weak spots in the lens line-up is the lack of really good wide primes that are relatively affordable, which is why I went with this Tokina. The 24 1.8 and 28 1.8 are your best options. But pricey. I went with the 14-24, which rivals, if not surpasses, the sharpness of those lenses.

I use the tokina for landscapes so I am not concerned with speed or performance, just image quality, and it delivers for me there. If you need a large aperture for portraits or low light work, your options are a bit limited.
 
I rarely do much wide angle so the 24-85 does very well for a budget glass if 24 is wide enough. I owned the 24mm 2.8d as well as the tokina 17mm, atx-pro (great budget 17mm if you need that wide), nikon 24-70, nikon 14-24, and tamron 14mm. With all that said the newer 24-85mm vr is a really good lens for the price, i doubt you will find any better FF lens that covers 24mm, for $300, not only that, it has vr and af-s and can zoom to 85mm. The main thing that does let it be great, is because like said above there really is not a lot of cheap options.
 
Since you are into taking night pictures I think it makes sense to go with the 28 f/1.8g because it is a 1.8 lens. If you want to save some money though, have a look at a 28mm f/2.8 ai-s. Never used a 28 f2.8d but the older ai-s is supposedly sharper. It has the hard infinity stop and will probably cost around $150.
 
Based on my research, that lens is soft in the corners. One of Nikon's weak spots in the lens line-up is the lack of really good wide primes that are relatively affordable, which is why I went with this Tokina. The 24 1.8 and 28 1.8 are your best options. But pricey. I went with the 14-24, which rivals, if not surpasses, the sharpness of those lenses.

I use the tokina for landscapes so I am not concerned with speed or performance, just image quality, and it delivers for me there. If you need a large aperture for portraits or low light work, your options are a bit limited.

The tokina is a little soft wide open compared to a nikon, I'd recommend the 20mm Nikon ais or afd.
 
Based on my research, that lens is soft in the corners. One of Nikon's weak spots in the lens line-up is the lack of really good wide primes that are relatively affordable, which is why I went with this Tokina. The 24 1.8 and 28 1.8 are your best options. But pricey. I went with the 14-24, which rivals, if not surpasses, the sharpness of those lenses.

I use the tokina for landscapes so I am not concerned with speed or performance, just image quality, and it delivers for me there. If you need a large aperture for portraits or low light work, your options are a bit limited.

The tokina is a little soft wide open compared to a nikon, I'd recommend the 20mm Nikon ais or afd.

Which tokina compared to which Nikon?
 
Based on my research, that lens is soft in the corners. One of Nikon's weak spots in the lens line-up is the lack of really good wide primes that are relatively affordable, which is why I went with this Tokina. The 24 1.8 and 28 1.8 are your best options. But pricey. I went with the 14-24, which rivals, if not surpasses, the sharpness of those lenses.

I use the tokina for landscapes so I am not concerned with speed or performance, just image quality, and it delivers for me there. If you need a large aperture for portraits or low light work, your options are a bit limited.

The tokina is a little soft wide open compared to a nikon, I'd recommend the 20mm Nikon ais or afd.

Which tokina compared to which Nikon?

Both stopped down to f/8 or so, I can't see ANY IQ difference between the old-school Tokina 17/3.5 SL and my Nikkor 17-35/2.8 AF-D @ 17mm.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top