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!

Which Wide Angle Prime? (Nikkor 20 2.8, 24 2.8, or 28 2.8)

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by wgilles, Sep 15, 2008.

  1. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    I am thinking of getting a wide angle prime lens. I've been looking on B&H and found Nikons 3 wide angle prime lenses that offer super large apertures.

    They are the:
    Wide Angle AF Nikkor 28mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens
    Wide Angle AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens
    Super Wide Angle AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens

    Now the 20mm lens is twice the price of the 28mm lens. Is the extra 8mm really worth the double price? Or should I settle in the middle and get the 24mm?

    Any pictures from any of these lenses would be great! Please say which lens it is.
     
  2. RGB Bob

    RGB Bob Guest

    Will, on a D300, 24mm is not very wide. Get the widest you can afford.
     
  3. mood

    mood

    Jun 27, 2007
    suburbia, ny
    I am currently looking to the Sigma 20 1.8 for my D300
    a little wider and certainly faster than the uninspiring Nikon AFD lineup

    have a look at the Sigma 24/28 1.8 options
     
  4. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Well I have a 18-200mm right now and the 18 seems to be wide enough my shooting purposes, so the 20mm would probably be the best bet.
     
  5. There are a couple WA threads here in the lens lust forum.

    Rich
     
  6. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
  7. RichNY

    RichNY Guest

    Have you considered selling the 18-200 and getting a 17-55 instead (skipping the prime)?
     
  8. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Well the main reason I got the 18-200 was because I wanted an all-purpose lens for when I go into the city and stuff like that.
     
  9. I had the Sigma 20mm f/1.8 for a few weeks. It was large, heavy and not too sharp wide open in my experience. I sent it back and got the Nikon 20mm f/2.8 instead. It's sharp wide open, small enough to fit in a pocket and currently my favorite lens. It's an old design, to be sure, but it closely resembles what I see, IMO.

    2737438126_f705cfedb0_o.

    2853719268_204daf67e2_o.
     
  10. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    ^^Those are some nice shots with the Nikon 20mm. I really like number 2, I think you've just sold me.
     
  11. another vote here for the 20mm f2.8. great little lens, wish i hadnt parted ways of mine, must look into reaquiring this little gem.
     
  12. cculler

    cculler

    313
    Aug 12, 2008
    Seattle-ish
    If you're looking for wide angle, then the 20mm will probably be your best bet.

    I myself just bought the 28mm f/2.8 and am very impressed with the performance as a "normal" lens. Great for group portraits, so you don't have to back up as far as the 50mm (my other prime), and it does landscapes pretty well, too. I don't have too many examples, but here are a couple:

    2821046278_3bfd98347c_o.

    2850106524_178ed85279_o.

    I got mine used for $150 including tax at a local camera store. A great bargain.
     
  13. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Sure is a good bargain at 150! I'll probably look for a used version of the 20mm to save a couple bucks.
     
  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.