On Mon, 6 Sep 1999 13:59:02 -0500, "Mike H"
>Hope this hasn't been hashed over before but....
>
>Does anyone have any experience with this lens? I have the need for a fast
>prime, and a friend of a friend is selling.
>I've been using the Nikkor 20-35mm and haven't been that impressed (or at
>least consistently impressed
Hmmm...., Don Ferrario kindly lent me his 28mm f1.4
recently, and here is what I found (B&W film, my
standard lens comparison tests [mostly with infinity
subjects]):
- This sample showed some optical misalignment
(visible in F3 and 8008 finders, and on film mostly
around f2.8-4 where softness at the wide stops and
DOF at the smaller stops didn't partially cover it).
Misalignment (irregular variation in focus around the
frame), BTW, is not uncommon in zooms and fast
non-zooms with "floating elements" - and is not
unknown even in lenses of simple design... (people
should not assume that a new lens is without defects).
- At f1.4 and f2 the image quality was surprisingly
high (not perfect, and a bit soft in the corners,
with illumination loss toward the corners at f1.4 -
but better than the 35mm f1.4 Nikkor and about equal
at f1.4 to a good-sample 35mm f2 AIS Nikkor at f2).
- At f2.8, it was better in the corners and a bit
better at the edges than a 28mm f2.8 *AIS* Nikkor
(which is very good wide open), but slightly worse
over much of the frame. (Edges were about the same
in the two lenses with the f2.8 at one smaller stop.)
- At f4-5.6, it was quite good over the entire
frame, but by f5.6 the f2.8 and *f4* PC Nikkors
were slightly better over most of the frame.
- At f8-11, the 28mm f4 PC was better over most of
the frame, with about equal (very good) corners; the
far corners of the f2.8 were inferior, but the rest
of the frame of the f2.8 was equal or better than
the f1.4 at f8-11.
- At f16 diffraction was the great equalizer, and
all were nearly the same in performance.
The 28mm f1.4 is remarkably even in performance
(for both good and bad...) from about f2.8 to f16,
and quite useable at the widest two stops (showing
only a bit of softness at the edges/corners wide
open. It is not as good at optimum syops as the
best of the alternatives. Since a 28mm lens can be
hand-held at relatively long shutter speeds, this
lens is effectively VERY F-A-S-T!!! It can also
be used for unique limited-DOF wide-angle photos,
since it is so good at wide stops. I did not check
AF, since I find it useless; MF, in common with
other faster-than-f2 lenses, is not as easy as
one might expect (VF optics better match f2-2.8
lenses in cameras with good MF VF optics - AF
camera VF optics are often matched to slow zooms,
making them nearly useless for MF with fast
lenses...)
Strengths: good center-to-corner sharpness uniformity;
good wide-aperture performance; good performance at
all focus distances; speed. Weaknesses: size/weight/
price; slightly inferior performance over most of
the frame (sharpness and "snap") compared with the
best slower Nikkor 28mm lenses.
BTW, I shot a roll of color slide film with all
three 28mm lenses plus the 28-70mm zoom (all at
f5.6 and f11, with very slight bracketing, to match
slide densities) using the same distant subject
material on a hazy-bright day. Since some people
claim color-rendition differences (other than
color-cast and contrast/brilliance differences)
with different lenses, it will be interesting
to see what the slides show when they are
processed (I tend not to believe in this...;-).
Also BTW, there is a Nikkor evaluation list
(and some other lens reviews) on my web page,
under "I babble"...