Riddle me this...

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by RichA, May 9, 2011.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Why would someone pay $2900 for a Nikon 28mm f1.4 when the new 24mm
    f1.4 is out and $1800.00? Is the 28mm a better lens? $3k is what the
    28mm go for on Ebay.
     
    RichA, May 9, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    If they want a 28mm lens, not 24mm - pretty big difference.
     
    Paul Furman, May 9, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    Don't you know how important size is ;-)
     
    Whisky-dave, May 9, 2011
    #3
  4. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    Exactly so. If you want a 28mm lens, a 24mm simply won't do, no
    matter whether Rich thinks it is a "better" lens.

    In Japan, 28mm has always been a very popular focal length. It is the
    most popular wide angle lens, just as 135mm is the most popular
    short/medium telephoto and by far the most popular focal length for
    portraits.

    In Europe, 35mm was the most popular wide angle lens. 24mm was
    latterly more popular than 28mm, with Europeans strongly preferring
    focal lengths between 85mm and 105mm for portraiture. Different
    markets have different tastes.

    I strongly suspect the demand for the 28mm f/1.4 Nikkor is from
    collectors in Japan and Hong Kong who tend to dominate the market for
    unusual lenses. One notable German online store selling lenses to
    collectors has actually moved to the Far East because that is where
    most of their market is.
     
    Bruce, May 9, 2011
    #4
  5. RichA

    RichA Guest

    So, er, cropping a 24mm shot to get the same angle of coverage is out
    of the question, with resolution the way it is now?
    From a practical standpoint, it's an area loss of about 15%, not
    critical.
    Better to have the wide angle at hand than not. I couldn't believe
    how many times the 16mm position on the Nikon 16-85mm (24mm equivalent
    to a 16mm in FF) just allowed for certain architectural shots where an
    18mm (27mm equivalent) wouldn't.
    I'd agree with that. I was at an auction recently and most of the old
    equipment was bought by the Chinese.
     
    RichA, May 9, 2011
    #5
  6. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    Don't be silly, and learn some elementary math. Compared to the
    viewed area of a 28mm lens, a 24mm views 36.1% more. So you would be
    throwing away (36.1/136.1) x 100 = 26.5%.

    It's the sort of thing you might have to do in desperation if you
    forgot to pack your 28mm lens but carried a 24mm. It is not the sort
    of thing you would choose to do.


    That's the same kind of attitude as the one that causes people to buy
    (D)SLR lenses with extremely large zoom ranges, in the process
    abandoning the image quality that they used as their justification for
    buying a (D)SLR in the first place.

    It's a very common attitude, one that is so often espoused on here by
    DSLR owners who belittle superzoom and P&S cameras - despite being
    completely unable to produce any shot whose quality exceeds those from
    top quality superzoom and P&S cameras.
     
    Bruce, May 9, 2011
    #6
  7. RichA

    Rich Guest

    Ok, but who really cares about "area" when setting up a shot. The linear
    dimensions are all that matter.
    Why? How large are you printing? At what print size would you notice a
    crop from a 24mm versus a 28mm straight shot, with cameras sporting 16
    megapixels or more? Notice I'm not talking about the actual appearance
    of the angle of view from either lens, or the increase DOF (at the same
    focal ratio) with the 24mm lens.

    I'm not arguing for the zoom range, only its widest end having been more
    useful (for me, admittedly) than an 18mm typical of a kit lens.
     
    Rich, May 9, 2011
    #7
  8. RichA

    Eric Stevens Guest

    That's my experience exactly. I have the same lens and feel the same
    way about it. In the days of 35mm film I found that I preferred a 24mm
    lens to the much more common 28mm and that opinion has followed me to
    the present day.
    Regards,

    Eric Stevens
     
    Eric Stevens, May 9, 2011
    #8
  9. RichA

    Eric Stevens Guest

    I don't think you can apply that comment to the Nikon AF-S Nikkor
    16-85mm 1:3.5-5.6GED (why do they make the reference codes so long?)
    Regards,

    Eric Stevens
     
    Eric Stevens, May 9, 2011
    #9
  10. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    That's the lamest of lame replies, even for you. :)


    Funny how you're not talking about the things that matter most to a
    photographer. But then you're a gear head, not a photographer.


    No-one with any ability (or judgment) would use a 16-85mm Nikkor for
    architectural photography. But the sort of person who cannot see the
    difference between 24mm and 28mm focal lengths might ...
     
    Bruce, May 9, 2011
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.