Blur Shadow
Senior Member
tao said:
Oh really? I used the 20mm prime on the D700. Not that impressed. The f/2.8 primes are sharper and better in every way.
user opinion on the 20mm 2.8D
- Thread starter kwanhan
- Start date
Oh really? I used the 20mm prime on the D700. Not that impressed. The f/2.8 primes are sharper and better in every way.
Blur Shadow
Senior Member
I'm actually surprised by the positive reception thus far.
As mentioned earlier, I paired the 20mm with a D700 once and didn't really think much of it.
For the price, it is certainly decent, and I don't think I ought to be expecting the sun and moon with the lens.
Yet, the flaws are quite obvious on FX, and i'd rather go for any other f/2.8 zoom lens that covers this focal range than to use this lens.
Wide angle primes were the Achilles Heel of Nikon for a long while, and I am quite thankful and impressed by the latest and proposed additions by Nikon.
Meanwhile, this lens isn't all that bad once you factored in the cost. My opinion is that I'd only pair this with a FX camera, and I think I can get much better results by getting the Nikon f/2.8 zoom lenses. Of course, the zoom lenses are astronomically priced when compared to the 20mm prime, but i just think that if I were to go FX, I ought to have the cash.
As mentioned earlier, I paired the 20mm with a D700 once and didn't really think much of it.
For the price, it is certainly decent, and I don't think I ought to be expecting the sun and moon with the lens.
Yet, the flaws are quite obvious on FX, and i'd rather go for any other f/2.8 zoom lens that covers this focal range than to use this lens.
Wide angle primes were the Achilles Heel of Nikon for a long while, and I am quite thankful and impressed by the latest and proposed additions by Nikon.
Meanwhile, this lens isn't all that bad once you factored in the cost. My opinion is that I'd only pair this with a FX camera, and I think I can get much better results by getting the Nikon f/2.8 zoom lenses. Of course, the zoom lenses are astronomically priced when compared to the 20mm prime, but i just think that if I were to go FX, I ought to have the cash.
i think if you re going for technical perfection (corner sharpness, sharpness in general, vignetting, sharpness, and more sharpness) you wont like it. but the truth is there's much more to a lens than 'sharpness'. my brief encounter with the lens left a good impression and i quite liked the rendition. colours were punchy without being too contrasty, and i was more than ready to replace my 17-35 2.8 with it. in the end i went for the tokina 17 3.5 though, and have never missed the 17-35 ( talk about horrible corner performance >< )
Blur Shadow
Senior Member
The lack of sharpness was apparent to me right away, but my greatest disappointment was with the colors it produces. Perhaps I'm getting too used to the colors produced by the modern Nikon primes (24mm, 35mm and 85mm f/1.4), i do not find the colors it produced appealing, and certainly not "sharp and contrasty" or "punchy" as some fellow CSers describe.
The colors, however, do inspire a sense of nostalgia, as this were the colors I was used to while shooting 35mm film.
Ultimately, I do concede that the low price of this lens means that I can't ask for too much.
The colors, however, do inspire a sense of nostalgia, as this were the colors I was used to while shooting 35mm film.
Ultimately, I do concede that the low price of this lens means that I can't ask for too much.
kwanhan
Senior Member
wanting to replace the 17-35 with it is quite a claim :bsmilie:
anyway i'm mostly intrigued by the photographic opportunities that the ability to focus up close presents.
here's an unedited raw to jpeg conversion from my d300 at iso 400, 2.8 ... was testing it at peninsular, no prizes for guessing where lol
Andrew Ng
New Member
kwanhan
Senior Member
thanks Andrew! I feel loved :bsmilie:
there does seem to be a certain (film-like?) quality to the colour rendition
Andrew Ng
New Member
Yes. Especially on AFD lens + Nikon Lens. My Cam Bodies are loaded with 'fuji velvia' picture control and customized to look and feel like my FM2 film days.
Ok. Will remove the pics.
true true, but the truth is that the 17-35 doesnt compare well to primes at all. its v v good at f/8, but i never had the confidence of using it wide open. the corners at 17mm are horrible, and the out of focus rendition is very ugly. it also lacked a crisp feel to the shots, and colours were a little smudgy. i was just getting really irritated for having paid so much for something that wouldnt deliver wide open. for the same price i replaced it with a 17/3.5, 24/2.8 AIS, 35/1.4 AIS, all of which can be shot wide open with relative impunity, and i dare say outperforms the 17-35 in almost all aspects.
anw, back to the 20/2.8D, this one kinda sucks, but the only one left >< can dl the full size too. http://hashbr0wn.deviantart.com/#/d4stnxu
Last edited:
kwanhan
Senior Member
Yes. Especially on AFD lens + Nikon Lens. My Cam Bodies are loaded with 'fuji velvia' picture control and customized to look and feel like my FM2 film days.
Ok. Will remove the pics.
so were those shots deliberately processed as such?
kwanhan
Senior Member
Andrew Ng
New Member
No... I think I will stop telling more here... may end up with a long write up and revive the RTFM thingy.
Its a nice lens. Have fun.
thanks for sharing
weren't you the one who shared about the 180 2.8 the last time I started a thread asking about budget FX lenses?
mm.. would probably be me ^^v i like to try the less heard of lenses to see what they re like, found quite a number of unsung heroes in the process
i love the way you light your subjects! very very nice =)No... I think I will stop telling more here... may end up with a long write up and revive the RTFM thingy.
Its a nice lens. Have fun.
kwanhan
Senior Member
No... I think I will stop telling more here... may end up with a long write up and revive the RTFM thingy.
Its a nice lens. Have fun.
yes i understand what it means when u said u load that particular picture control for your cameras.
what i was trying to understand, is if those pictures were deliberately chosen and shown for my benefit (as I did for the test shot I posted, direct raw to jpeg conversion) ... since i was asking for samples.
... but based on your reply i know the answer now.
Hi,
My comment is that the lens itself is soft wide open. But it does improves when stopped down to at least f4.
I was surprised when I first try it out. Colours are alright; identical to a typical 50 f1.4 (sorry folks that's the next available prime I am lay my hands on).
Or maybe this is just luck when you purchase a less than perfect lens. But base on my usage, this lens does not seem to deliver the lights into my D700 sensor.
My comment is that the lens itself is soft wide open. But it does improves when stopped down to at least f4.
I was surprised when I first try it out. Colours are alright; identical to a typical 50 f1.4 (sorry folks that's the next available prime I am lay my hands on).
Or maybe this is just luck when you purchase a less than perfect lens. But base on my usage, this lens does not seem to deliver the lights into my D700 sensor.
kwanhan
Senior Member
do you have any wide open shots to share?
i'm interested in using it for portraits so wide open performance is of interest to me
do you have any wide open shots to share?
i'm interested in using it for portraits so wide open performance is of interest to me
I cannot recall if I still keep them. It was just some fun tes shots using my D700 and probably using my friend's D50 IR setup. No promise, will try do a search. Generally, you could also check it out probably at pixel-peeper for some sample photos.
thanks for all the feedback
but i'm wondering how do u guys usually use your UWA? (up close and personal? or hang back and squeeze everything in)
Don't ever do the latter. It's the worst possible use of a UWA. You ALWAYS need foreground interest in a UWA shot. UWAs increase perceived distance between foreground and background, so if you don't have anything in the foreground, you'll end up with a big blank frame with tiny specs in the center.
On topic, I don't have this lens, but I do have a Sigma 20 f1.8. Here are some shots with this lens on DX to show you what you can do with this focal length:
Stopped down:
Wide open (Didn't have the hood with me and it shows):
Similar threads
