1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Love/Hate relationship..Nikkor 20/2.8 AF-D

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by tasnim_fahim, Jun 29, 2007.

  1. tasnim_fahim


    Oct 2, 2006
    Sometimes this lens gives me excellent results, at other times I curse it.
    As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out on this one.

    No denying it weight though!!

    in the fields in Canada:


    during a snow blizzard in Norway:


  2. I had this lens (changed it for an Ai-S version). I found that it consistently produced excellent quality images.
    It is difficult to judge by a web version, but yours, particularly your first one, look great!
  3. tasnim_fahim


    Oct 2, 2006

    Thanks for your comments. I shall retain it for web shots!:wink:

  4. very nice! i'm curious, could you show me an example where this lens has yielded poor results for you? i'm considering adding this lens to my arsenal.
  5. Chris101


    Feb 2, 2005
    I have Frits' lens! I use it on film and have found that it is extremely sharp and there is little light fall-off in the corners. That is an affliction that nearly every other lens with that angle of view suffers from.

    Of course on digital, that is of little concern, however I feel that the 20mm does not improve on the IQ of Nikon's 12-24DX lens at 20mm. On film though the 20 beats the 12-24 (and it does cover the film format at 20mm) in both sharpness and even illumination.

    I actually did some tests of this comparison, and if I ever find some time I'll publish them here.
  6. weiran


    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    The main problem with the 20mm is that it produces a lot of CA on digital compared to film, this is where the benefits of lenses specifically designed with digital sensors come into play and I wouldn't recommend it.

    On film however it is supposed to be fantastic.

    My 12-24mm is incredibly sharp from 20-24mm, even when not stopped down and this lens is one of the few ultrawide choices for DX IMO (and the Tokina alternative).
  7. An alternative to the AFD 20mm is the AIS 20mm f/2.8 lens. This lens is amazingly sharp with digital. AF with a lens wider than about 24mm is not important to me.


  8. weiran


    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    The 17-55 is pretty good wide open, I doubt you'll see much difference between the primes and the zoom.
  9. Rockdog


    Jan 28, 2006
    Canmore, Canada
    I have both the afd 20 and the 12-24 nikon. When comparing the two side by side at f4, the prime is sharper towards the edges, however I find the sharpness in the center to be extremely close. My zoom is noticeably sharper across the entire frame from 5.6 on. I should also mention that the two lenses give very different looks, the zoom has more contrast and the colours have more punch, whereas the prime is more subtle in both regards.

    Where I like the prime is low light and situations where lens size & weight is an issue. The wider aperture allows the af to be more accurate when using the outlying sensors on my D200, in anything close to low light I revert to center area only on the zoom.

    I really like the images the 12-24 produces. Every time I take it climbing I am convinced I should use it exclusively. The 20 is fine, and I use it lots due to it's size, but I do wish it matched the look of the 12-24.

    If and when nikon produces an updated 16-20mm prime, I am all over it.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.