"brian" <brianc1959@aol.com> wrote in message

news:3c459ba.0311170506.322ecc25@posting.google.com...

> "dan" <danbib@wp.pl> wrote in message news:<bp7hjk$aos$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl>...

> > Has anyone had any expierience with AF Nikkor 28mm/2.8D, 24mm/2.8D on

> > 20mm/2.8D ? I'd be greatful for opinions because I'm thinking of buying one

> > for my F80. I'm particulary interested in the level of eventual distortions,

> > sharpness, coulour and contrast.

> Of these three I have the 20/2.8D. Its *almost* as good as my

> 17-35/2.8 zoom at 20mm. Note that the zoom improves at 24mm and 28mm.

> The simple fact is that Nikon wide angle primes need a facelift

> bigtime because the only advantage they have over the zoom lens is

> weight, cost, and in a few cases speed.

> Brian

> www.caldwellphotographic.com

But this tells us that the 17-35mm f2.8 Nikkor is REALLY EXCELLENT,

since it compares so well with a fine set of non-zooms in its range. The

non-zooms are FAR smaller and lighter and cheaper, though - and still

excellent, so....;-)

BTW, I compare the 17-35mm f2.8 and 18-35mm f3.5-4.5 Nikkor

zooms with several good non-zoom Nikkors in its range (or close, with

the 15mm), and also find the 17-35mm quite remarkable (I did not like

the 20-35...). The comparison is at:

http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/wa-zooms.htm.

--

David Ruether

d_ruether@hotmail.com

http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com