On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:16:19 GMT, "Gregg" <jurisdoc@teleport.com> wrote:

>The Nikon 20 mm f/2.8 is a superb lens, in fact my favorite wide for the

>Nikon bodies. Not quite as good as the Zeiss T 21 mm f/2.8 (Contax G), but

>still a very very good piece of glass. I now use the ATP Pro 20-35 for

>convience. It is good, but the 20 mm nikkor is definitely better. Some

>people feel the Nikon 17-35 mm f/2.8 is equal to, or better than the fixed

>wide angles. Can't comment since I never owned that partcular lens.

I compare the Nikkor 17-35mm f2.8 with some Nikkor

non-zooms at www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/articles.html

(look for the article in the index [2nd down, I think...]).

At 20mm, the zoom is a touch better than the excellent

20mm f2.8, especially near the corners at stops wider

than f5.6 (pretty amazing lens!).

>The very best choice for architecture would probably have to be one of the

>wide manual shift lenses:

>

>28 mm f/3.5, or 35 mm f/2.8; Nikon also makes an autofocus full shift and

>tilt 85 mm f/2.8

I prefer the older 28mm f4 PC Nikkor for better edge

performance shifted, and the latest-version of the 35mm

f2.8 for the same reason. The 85 is MF, alas, and also

does not have an automatic diaphragm, unfortunately...

(BTW, you may find this Nikkor evaluation list

interesting: www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/slemn.html).

>Check out the incredible images Bjorn Rorslett has achieved with his

>modified shift (And Tilt) 28 mm f/ 3.5

>http://www.naturfotograf.com/28pc.html

Interesting - though I'd be tempted to buy a Canon 24mm

T/S lens (and body, darn!) rather than trying to modify

a Nikkor 28mm... BTW, the Nikon PB-4 T/S bellows can be

fitted with 100-135mm lenses that will focus to infinity

(I use Schneider/Vivitar lenses press-fitted into BR2

rings, with strong skylight filters for color-matching

Nikkors). (Also BTW, I have a nice spare PB4 FS at

www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/fs.htm ...;-)