The following is a review I had written in early 1999 for the 20mm lens and it represents mainly my views in respect to shooting film (Velvia & Provia).
The field of view of this lens has always been favoured when shooting anything from landscapes to environmental portraits. Over the years I've had two Nikon samples go through my hands; the early AF version of 1989 and the later AF-D version of 1994. I've also used an old Ai-S version a few times that belonged to a friend and apart from the better feel of the MF version they all performed the same optically. I should add here that all three are of the same optical design that incorporates CRC technology, though I believe the AF-D version has a different and theoretically better multilayer coating, something that is hard to distinguish.
Supposedly the coatings of modern lenses are significantly better, resulting in less flare and higher contrast but for the majority of my shooting, I can’t really see a difference unless shooting a test chart in controlled conditions for comparison. This doesn’t mean all lenses are equal or that modern lenses are better, since some designs are not so great, due to their oversimplified design.
Today the Nikon AF 20mm f/2.8D is my favourite lens. Is it a better performer than the others? Well not exactly. When studying some of the slides taken with the above-mentioned lenses, there are no detectable differences. Optically I place them in the same performance category. I personally believe looking at some of my slides that the Nikon AF 20mm f/2.8D has much better contrast and better flare control resulting in richer colours, but this is just a feeling. I can’t see anything tangible to distinguish the three lenses optically.
I use this lens a lot and love it; it has performed admirably at all apertures except for the extremes. Now some people report distortion with this lens, but I honestly believe that they are referring to natural distortion due to perspective and not to the unwanted pincushion and barrel type of distortion, commonly found on most zooms and telephotos.
When facing a large square building the side closest to us will seem larger than the rear due to the natural laws of perspective. A wide-angle lens will only exaggerate this and the wider we go the more pronounced this effect will be. Parallel lines will seem to converge at some point in the far distance, and will be exaggerated even more if we tilt the lens. Most people don't comprehend the scale of this effect with the 20mm until they actually see their first photos. It does need some getting used too, so anything containing straight lines may warrant holding the camera in such a way as to keep the film plane vertical to the ground and parallel to the horizon.
With environmental portraits it is preferable to keep the lens at the same level as the faces and try to place them closer to the centre of the frame if we desire the least amount of perspective-distortion.
Becoming more critical, I did find something odd with the particular lens that I was using. The contrast was very good at f/2.8 & f/4 (quite unexpected) but at f/5.6 it consistently lost contrast (with all films and under different situations) and I can't explain why. This reminds me of what Jay Platter found when testing teleconverters on a Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED-IF N (posted his findings on rec.photo.equipment.35mm).
At f/8 the 20mm f/2.8D gives the best contrast and at f/11 & f/16 it gives the best resolution especially when focused near, like 2m or 5m rather than INF. At f/22 there is a slight and noticeable drop-off in contrast as well as resolution which of course is due to diffraction but still better than f/5.6 (for this particular lens).
Obviously I will not be using f/5.6 with this particular copy of the lens and would welcome any comments and especially would love to hear if anybody else experienced the f/5.6 problem with the 20mm or any other lens for that matter. I will be using this lens at f/16 for those landscapes that require great D.O.F and maximum sharpness.
I also find it an excellent lens for environmental portraits wide open or at f/4, with good contrast and sharpness. Naturally there is some softening towards the corners of the frame though this is not noticeable unless you actually search for it and personally I think that it can be a plus in a lot of photos. Its quite obvious that someone that will be using this lens at f/2.8 or f/4 will not be shooting architecture or landscapes but most probably people, so some softness towards the corners is of no concern. Some pros are using this lens for architecture with great success and haven’t noticed any barrel distortion, though it does exist in a small dose towards the far edges of the frame. There are the usual converging verticals, but straight lines are always rendered as straight lines.
When using this lens wide open and photographing people up close, for best results I recommend manual focusing. I mention this because I find that manual focusing seems more accurate and easier. A friend shooting those types of shots wide open, with autofocus seems to always place that sharp line of focus in the wrong place resulting in a sharper shoulder in comparison to the face. Don't get me wrong, it isn't that noticeable with such a wide lens and at small enlargements but with shots that are taken wide open and printed large you can distinguish quite clearly that the sharp field of focus is anywhere but where the face is.
Groups/Elements: 9/12
Picture Angle: 94 degrees
Minimum f/stop: f/22
Closest Focusing Distance: 0,25m
Diaphragm Blades: 7
Maximum Reproduction Ratio: 1/8.3
Autofocus System: Std
Filter Diameter (mm): 62mm
Diameter x Length (mm): 69mm x 42.5mm
Weight (g): 270g
Lens Hood: HB-4
Notes: CRC
DOF when focused @ INF=
f/5.6 = 2.3m - INF
f/8 = 1.6m - INF
f/11 = 1.2m - INF
In production since: 1st:02-1989, 2nd: 03-1994
A sample of what the 20mm can produce
From memory probably shot this at 1/30 at f/16.
Although I am a big fan of tripod use and I strongly promote its usefulness I did not use a tripod for this shot. I was kneeling in the freezing wet snow with both elbows resting on knees for support.
John Cazolis
(aka Nikkor on Nikongear)
Tell us about your experiences with the Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 AF-D
:
[1] 2
 Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
In my 35 mm film days, the 20 mm was also my favorite lens, I started off with my first, a very large f 3.5 version hung off a Nikon F2 in 1974. Since moving to digital, first with a D100 and later a D2x, I tried to use the 20 2.8 AF D, but with the lens factor, it was just not the same. I recently purchased a D3, in part because I wanted to be able to use my old Full Frame lenses at the focal length God intended (just kidding about the God thing).
I have noticed, in the few shoots I have done with the 20 on the D3 that there is a bit of vignetting (this more to do with Nikon FX sensor) and for the first time, I'm seeing a little bending of the horizontals. I have not done any serious testing, just some informal observations.
The real test will be next month when I take the D2x and the D3 back to New Orleans for Mardi Gras (This will be Mardi Gras #17 for me), and give it a real workout in the streets.
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
2: July 29, 2008, 11:47:05 PM by fksbought this lens to replace a tokina 20-35mm f/2.8 for shooting automobiles at the import shows. sharp and contrasty, plus very small and light.
drawback was the movement of the front element during AF. i tend to hold the lens as far out as possible, something you can't do with this lens when it's focusing.
i sold it when i bought a 17-35mm f/2.8. looking back, i should've kept it to have a small and light ultra-wide lens on the D3.
ricky
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
On a D200 it was sharp and very fast to focus. Distortion was pretty good but not great. CA was distinctly visible. I sold it and relaced it with the AIS version which whilst not quite having the bite of the AF-D was still very sharp and had less distortion and CA.
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
4: September 03, 2008, 08:16:01 AM by vantjeI bougt this lens in 1999 for use with my analog camera's (F90x and F100).
Great optic with film and good color saturation.
On Digital Dx-camera's (D200) however this lens was disappointing: lots of CA and soft in the corners.
I've sold it then to buy the 17-55/2.8 and the difference was staggering.
Now I have the D700, and I wonder how it would perform on FF.
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
5: November 06, 2008, 05:10:11 PM by imajinNever gave it too much thought with my DX bodies. Use it on FX and love it.
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
6: November 06, 2008, 08:38:52 PM by NoctI have a (wobbly) 20/2.8AF on loan for a few weeks now, and stopped down it performs nice on the D700, much better than expected. But I don't like it that much full open. There is some flare however.
In comparison, my new 14-24/2.8 beats it easily at all apertures. But this is a much larger and rather expensive lens.
If you like a 20mm lens on FX with a smaller signature, it might be a way to go.
Personally, I would like to hear about the differences between the 20/2.8Ais and the 20/2.8AF (on FX).
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
I had a 20 f2.8 AIS for a short time. It was excellent on DX (D300) but it wasn't so impressive on FX and the corners were just too soft. Physically it was a lovely little lens - neat, small and LIGHT!! but when I got a 17-35 it just didn't measure up and I sold it.
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
8: December 01, 2008, 05:29:33 PM by smheseHad one in the 90s with an FM2 but sold it when I got a D1x. Lately I bought one again. Its not so sharp in the corners (as others have mentioned) but its so compact and light, its just a very good all around lens with my D2x at the moment. It makes also a good package for star trails with the FM3a. I compared it a while ago to a Tokina 12-24 and the Tokina was better, but the 20-2.8 is just a wonderful small package that I have often with me when I want it light.
Sören
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
I have had good experiences with mine. I use it primarily for landscapes, but I have used it occasionally for group shots and candids. It is bit soft on the edges wide open, but it isn't really noticeable unless you are looking for it. This with my 80-200 and 50 make up my walking around kit.
Re: Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
10: December 23, 2008, 05:50:54 PM by gpdThis is probably my favourite lens. Set it at f/8, set focus ring to hyperfocal, shoot all day long.
I do have a couple of criticisms: sharpness is great at the centre but the corners are mushy and there's a lot of CA ... but neither of these really bother me.
[1] 2
|
W O R K S H O P S
Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D
