Autofocus Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D IF Aspherical

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Paul Furman - 04 Dec 2006 18:33 GMT

Any opinions on this out-of-production lens?
Autofocus Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D IF Aspherical
It seems to be nearly as good as the exceptional newer 17-35/2.8 and
similarly large but considerably less expensive used, like $750 instead
of $1500. No AF-S.
http://www.bythom.com/2035lens.htm

Reply to this Message

Tien - 04 Dec 2006 19:00 GMT

> Any opinions on this out-of-production lens?
> Autofocus Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D IF Aspherical
> It seems to be nearly as good as the exceptional newer 17-35/2.8 and
> similarly large but considerably less expensive used, like $750 instead
> of $1500. No AF-S.
> http://www.bythom.com/2035lens.htm

I have it on my D200 most of the time. It used to be on my F4s and I
didn't find anything to complain about then. Now on the D200, I find
good sharpness and chromatic aberration control if stopped to atleast
4.8 or 5.6. Below that, I am pretty disappointed. It is a bit fragile
and even though I baby it, somehow the focus got banged a bit out of
shape and it misses at 3 feet or less. I hardly focussed at all on my
friend's D70. From 5 feet to infinity, the focussing is right on (but
then, with a wide angle like this one, I can never be quite sure but
the images are sharp anyway at those distances).

Tien

Reply to this Message

Paul Furman - 04 Dec 2006 19:44 GMT

>>Any opinions on this out-of-production lens?
>>Autofocus Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D IF Aspherical
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> then, with a wide angle like this one, I can never be quite sure but
> the images are sharp anyway at those distances).

Thanks, hmm, I'm surprised you aren't happy with the sharpness wide open
and surprised it got damaged as it's supposed to built like a tank. I
found another review actually of the 17-35:
http://www0.epinions.com/content_86995668612
which explains the differences are mainly the extra 3mm obviously and
closer focusing on the 17-35 and better control of flare and ghosting,
which is pretty important actually. Big price difference though. I don't
see the need for AF-S for a wide lens.

http://www.photographyreview.com/pscLenses/35mm,Zoom/Nikon/PRD_83531_3128crx.aspx
This one rates the flare control as great, but corner softness wide
open. Hmmm

Reply to this Message

Tony Polson - 04 Dec 2006 20:09 GMT

>>>Any opinions on this out-of-production lens?
>>>Autofocus Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D IF Aspherical
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>This one rates the flare control as great, but corner softness wide
>open. Hmmm

Paul,

On the positive side, the 20-35mm f/2.8 AF Nikkor was probably my
favourite Nikkor. At every focal length except 28mm, it performed
better optically than the comparable fixed focal length Nikkor. Only
the 28mm f/2.8 AF-D Nikkor would beat it. The 24mm f/2.8 AF-D Nikkor
merely equalled it. The 20mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/2 AF-D Nikkors did not
come close, except the 35mm gave an extra stop compared to the zoom.

On the negative side, there is considerable sample variation. The
glass aspheric element was hand ground. Poor samples exhibit
noticeable colour fringing, and that's on film. On digital, this
would presumably be even worse, although I only ever got to try the
lens on film. My samples (I had two at various times) did not suffer
from this, however.

I'm not sure that a 20-35mm focal length range on an APS-C sensor is
going to be much use, giving an equivalent 30-48mm.

If you want to buy one, you should either try before you buy, to test
for colour fringing, or buy from a seller with a good returns policy.

Tony

Reply to this Message

Paul Furman - 04 Dec 2006 22:13 GMT

> On the positive side, the 20-35mm f/2.8 AF Nikkor was probably my
> favourite Nikkor. At every focal length except 28mm, it performed
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> I'm not sure that a 20-35mm focal length range on an APS-C sensor is
> going to be much use, giving an equivalent 30-48mm.

Well, I never got a kit lens and I do have a 12-24 & 70-200 so it would
fill a gap for me. Not sure I want a big beast for walk-around use though.

> If you want to buy one, you should either try before you buy, to test
> for colour fringing, or buy from a seller with a good returns policy.

Yeah that would be possible with the $750 one. Sounds like a certain
amount of CA is unavoidable though.

Reply to this Message

Tony Polson - 04 Dec 2006 22:55 GMT

>> I'm not sure that a 20-35mm focal length range on an APS-C sensor is
>> going to be much use, giving an equivalent 30-48mm.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>Yeah that would be possible with the $750 one. Sounds like a certain
>amount of CA is unavoidable though.

Don't be such a pessimist!

Both my samples were free of any sign of CA. As often seems to happen
with pro grade Nikkors**, the later production was better. So avoid
the pre-D versions and go for the one with "AF Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D"
on it, and you are much more likely to get a good one.

[**Early examples of the 17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S lenses were atrocious.
Nikon improved the quality of manufacture. A few months later, the
lenses were consistently excellent.]

Reply to this Message

Tien - 04 Dec 2006 21:50 GMT

> Thanks, hmm, I'm surprised you aren't happy with the sharpness wide open

It's the color fringing which doesn't help.

> and surprised it got damaged as it's supposed to built like a tank.

Oops. You're right. I got the focussing problem confused with my
plasticky 20mmf2.8. :((
No problem with focussing on the 20-35...it is built like a tank. At
the moment, I just can't justify buying the 17-35 when I can get away
with stopping down to f4.8 for most of the photography I do.

Tien

Reply to this Message

Tien - 04 Dec 2006 21:50 GMT

> Thanks, hmm, I'm surprised you aren't happy with the sharpness wide open

It's the color fringing which doesn't help.

> and surprised it got damaged as it's supposed to built like a tank.

Reply to this Message

Philip Homburg - 04 Dec 2006 20:17 GMT

>Any opinions on this out-of-production lens?
>Autofocus Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D IF Aspherical
>It seems to be nearly as good as the exceptional newer 17-35/2.8 and
>similarly large but considerably less expensive used, like $750 instead
>of $1500. No AF-S.

I'm a bit suprised about those prices. I expect to pay less than 1000 euro
for a 17-35. My local 2nd camera shop has the 20-35 for EUR 495.

>http://www.bythom.com/2035lens.htm

Bjørn Rørslett has also quite a bit to say about the 20-35. Also
read his entry on the 17-35.

Signature

That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

Reply to this Message

Paul Furman - 04 Dec 2006 22:02 GMT

>>Any opinions on this out-of-production lens?
>>Autofocus Nikkor 20-35mm f/2.8D IF Aspherical
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> I'm a bit suprised about those prices. I expect to pay less than 1000 euro
> for a 17-35. My local 2nd camera shop has the 20-35 for EUR 495.

I see 17-35's sold on ebay for $1150 to $1450 (one for $750) and the
20-35's for $500, I was looking at one at a reputable dealer for $750.

>>http://www.bythom.com/2035lens.htm
>
> Bjørn Rørslett has also quite a bit to say about the 20-35. Also
> read his entry on the 17-35.

Ah, thanks:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_01.html
Hmm, he says he dumped his for a 28-70 and was not very flattering
though with huge expectations.

Reply to this Message

Rita Ä Berkowitz - 04 Dec 2006 22:34 GMT

> http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_zoom_01.html
> Hmm, he says he dumped his for a 28-70 and was not very flattering
> though with huge expectations.

The 17-35 and 28-70 are exceptionally nice lenses and I highly recommend
them.

Rita

Reply to this Message