Nikon 20mm 2.8

sunnyside_up

sunnyside_up

<span class="poty">POTY (Joint) 2016</span>
Messages
3,622
Name
Bethy
Edit My Images
No
Hi all

Ok, so I've got this Nikon 20mm 2.8 lens... I bought it off Joe McNally about a year and a half ago when he was having a clear out. It's a tasty little lens, pin sharp and really delivers... but I find I don't use it. When I think about selling it, I take it out, have a play with it, get all impressed with how sharp it is, then put it back in the camera bag. Where it sits.... again...
I have no real interest in landscape photography; I enjoy shooting people. I'm not sure why I even bought it. I've been seriously considering selling it again to fund a 35mm 1.8, but I'm trying to work out what it's really worth. When I look on fleabay, they all come up with the item description 2.8D - this doesn't have a D... It's autofocus, and works a dream on my D90... How much of an issue is this?

Thanks in advance

Beth
 
Yours must be the older non-D version. Same thing, just different build I think. It's hard find info on the older one.

Does it look like this:

http://www.mir.SPAM/rb/photography/...resources/AFNikkor/AFNikkor20mmf28D/index.htm
 
I wouldn't consider 20mm on a crop wide enough for a lot of landscape uses. 20mm on a crop camera is close to the 35mm field of view on a FF camera which is a street photographers favorite. Look at the x100 with its fixed 23mm lens. So maybe you should take up street!?:)

On the other hand you may well get more use out a 35mm.
 
Last edited:
The AF and AF-D are essentially the same lens but the D version sends distance information back to the body for use with TTL flash. My old one AF was pretty scratched on the front element but even declaring that it made about £170 on ebay. I'd guess a good one should clear £200, maybe more.
 
Cagey75 said:
Yours must be the older non-D version. Same thing, just different build I think. It's hard find info on the older one.

Does it look like this:

http://www.mir.SPAM/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/AFNikkor/AFNikkor20mmf28D/index.htm
Click to expand...

Nope... Looks the exact same as the D version...
 
rjbell said:
I wouldn't consider 20mm on a crop wide enough for a lot of landscape uses. 20mm on a crop camera is close to the 35mm field of view on a FF camera which is a street photographers favorite. Look at the x100 with its fixed 23mm lens. So maybe you should take up street!?:)

On the other hand you may well get more use out a 35mm.
Click to expand...

Yea, I'm thinking a 35mm on my cropped sensor would work a treat and going to seek one out when I get rid of this thing..
 
gad-westy said:
The AF and AF-D are essentially the same lens but the D version sends distance information back to the body for use with TTL flash. My old one AF was pretty scratched on the front element but even declaring that it made about £170 on ebay. I'd guess a good one should clear £200, maybe more.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this! Good info!
 
rjbell said:
I wouldn't consider 20mm on a crop wide enough for a lot of landscape uses. 20mm on a crop camera is close to the 35mm field of view on a FF camera which is a street photographers favorite. Look at the x100 with its fixed 23mm lens. So maybe you should take up street!?:)

On the other hand you may well get more use out a 35mm.
Click to expand...

Landscape doesn't have to be wide angle, in fact, most landscapers I know love to use a 70-200 as much as anything wider.
 
Why do people always say 'X' lens isn't wide enough for landscape then? Just wondering, as lots of people do - but often wider isn't better. I heard someone say recently UWA is useless for landscape - obviously just another opinion, but they may be right.
 
I can only go by my experience but i rarely should landscapes higher than 20mm, maybe its something do do with shooting on the coast not the countryside. There are times when i could use a zoom lens for rolling hills etc.. but i do not have a tele so the choice isn't there. A UWA isn't as good an option as say a WA like a 16-35 on a FF but i can't afford a FF yet!:)
 
Last edited:
I think you hit nail on head there - compression from tele's works better with hills/mountain ranges in the backdrop. I agree wider works better for sea-scapes. I envy you if you live by the coast, would love it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top