>
>Good point about the 14-24. It's probably quite a pain to
>carry around as well. The 28mm sounds great! I looked it up
>and it seems the f2.8 AI/AI-s is just as good or better
>(couldn't find a f3.5 online), but only a little more
>expensive. I might just get that one for a very light setup (a
>few primes and the pod). Any experience with the 2.8?
>

I agree with Tom about the AI 28mm f3.5. I have the AI 28mm f2.8, AIS 28mm f2.8, AI 28mm f3.5, the AF 28mm f2.8 and the AIS 28mm f2. I tested them all on a landscape scene using a D700. I found both of the f2.8 mf lenses had good center sharpness but were terrible on the edges from about 50 feet to infinity. The f3.5 and the f2.0 didn't have this problem. I generally will grab the f3.5 lens first. It is a fine lens. I also have the AFS 14-24mm but normally it stays at home because of it's much larger size and weight.

The only place I found the AIS 28mm f2.8 to be very good is on close-ups like in rooms about 15 feet long and shorter. It has extremely sharp center resolution at these close distances with the edges not as good.

edit:

My evaluation photos are in this thread.

http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=301&topic_id=7613&mesg_id=7613&page=2


Len

Visit my Nikonians gallery.