| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
|
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
  | sent on 28 Giugno 2020 Pros: Compact, well-built, sharp enough, good flare resistance in backlight, construction, color yield, well-readable tonal passages Cons: At the edges it loses a bit if not closed to f5.6-f8. Slight drop in contrast and saturation in the backlight. Opinion: I have a lens produced in 1988, which I have been using for a long time with great satisfaction. The main use is for portrait set, where, arranging the subject in an appropriate way, you can overcome the known perspective distortions related to the wide angle and where you can take advantage of the good rendering already at full opening that characterizes the 2/3 center of the frame. The blurring is good, without exaggeration, as indeed makes sense in a portrait set, where you want the environment to be readable anyway (otherwise it is useless to set it). For the cost, it's a superb optics. |
  | sent on 29 Dicembre 2018 Pros: compactness, colour rendering, autofocus Cons: In my opinion little performance on sensors from 36 mpx up Opinion: I had taken it as equivalent 35 with DX and in the transition to FX and D800 I decided to resell it. It's not that the surrender was horrible: simply the resolve to the edges on FX has never convinced me, as well as the distortion in general. I replaced it with the 20 AFS, which, despite the differences of the case, is a completely different point. I have nothing to say for the rest: very nice colors, rapid autofocus. I think on FX machines with 24 mpx at most can still say its. I would have kept it willingly but it made no sense in my outfit, especially once I purchased the Sigma 24-35 too. I didn't regret selling it. |
 | sent on 17 Agosto 2018 Pros: Light, compact, bright, well built. Useful in both dx and fx Cons: A dated project, today for the best detail on the whole frame there are optics designed for digital (but also the expense and footprint will be significantly higher). Opinion: A real cornerstone of the AFD kit, it responds to practical needs with well-studied compromises. It's okay for all diaphragms on dx, used as "35 equivalent." On FX, it changes skin from f5.6 to f8. Versatile in use (portrait set, landscape, interior, street,..) takes up little space in the bag and is able to give excellent satisfaction. |
 | sent on 30 Agosto 2017 Pros: Size, weight, color rendition, resolution on FF, cost Cons: Yield on APS-C, chromatic aberrations Opinion: It is a lens with a good chromatic rendering, less contrarated than modern lenses, but it suffers from comratic aberrations in TA and coma, above all on APS-C size evident up to F4; It solves the FF format well (probably up to 24mpx) but not so much the APS-C format (I don't recommend going beyond the 16MPX), while the blur is a bit rough and hard (the best yield from 5.6 to F8); The build quality is good, so weight and size, lens I recommend for these reasons on FF if you are looking for a fixed 24 honest and compact, but can be easily replaced by a good 24-70 or on DX by a 17-50/70. |
 | sent on 25 Luglio 2017 Pros: Nitride already af / 2.8, fast af, beautiful loaded colors. Cons: For the moment I do not find it. Opinion: Bought this morning and immediately put to the test. Definitely a great value for money. I've tried it on both D3 and D3X and the quality is the same, it does not even lose anything on the 24mpx of the D3X. Nitrite already at 2.8, closing the diaphragm becomes a blade. It delivers very beautiful and pasty colors, blur it badly, quickly af. My copy has no noticeable sharpness on the edges so marked as it reads around. |
 | sent on 03 Luglio 2017 Pros: Price, lightness, focal Cons: Poor sharpness on aps-c Opinion: Bought as a fixed lens handyman. It performs its role very well, light and precise and with a car autofocus fast enough while noisy. Perfect on aps-c as a street target, in my opinion it has only little solvency but I used it on nikon d7100 so I would recommend it for a fullframe or for sensors with a few megapixels. Only for semi-pro bodies as it has no lens autofocus. |
 | sent on 13 Marzo 2017 Pros: Compact and lightweight. Good sharpness in the center. Chromatic aberrations, distortion and vignetting contained Cons: To be a fixed is not bright. No sharpness at the edges of the full frame, even af ??/ 8. In fact it can be well covered by a semi-pro zoom with comparable performance Opinion: I'm rather upset. Initially I had bought it for making photos on the premises with the D7000. On APS-C, he works extensively on his work. When I went to the full frame, I thought I would keep it as a sharp optic for landscape photos. I compared it to the 24-120 VR f / 4, a mid-high band zoom. Distortion with the 24mm is contained, and is automatically corrected by Nikon software and the camera. Conversely, with 24-120, distortion is more pronounced, and is not completely corrected. The 24m purple fringing aberrations are non-existent, which can not be said of the zoom. Sharpness at the edges however is almost embarrassing af / 4. And it does not improve any more by stopping af / 5.6 of / 8. Ultimately, for landscape shots the 24-120 produces better images in post-production. Adding the fact that 24mm is a focal covered by many zoom, with a loss of brightness of up to one stop, I do not see many reasons to use it, apart from having a light wider wide angle. On APS-C is oneValid option, but I would recommend the 35mm f / 1.8 DX. Vote 7 on FF, 9 on APS-C |
 | sent on 05 Novembre 2016 Pros: Sharpness, construction Cons: I found none Opinion: Bought used, but in excellent condition, I wanted a good wide-angle lens with a fixed aperture ... I found it very good, very crisp, very comfortable for what concerns night views, and photos to the Milky Way, is a beautiful lens, turning a little crisp, robust, despite the ridiculous size, weighs parecchio.rnNel used market if they are several, and spending relatively little you can make a deal, being a glass that has nothing to envy to more moderne.rnUnica flaw slow, so if you can say, it is that it can be used, of course, only semi-pro bodies, since it has no AF interno.rnEstremamente recommended |
 | sent on 25 Agosto 2016 Pros: Beautifully crafted, metal and window of the depth of field. Brightness fixed. Cons: poor sharpness with Nikon D3300 Opinion: I made a comparison between 24mm F2.8D (perfect) with 18-55 VRII, after a few minutes and the same subject, same focal ie 24mm, same focus and same esposizione.Risultato parameters: the zoommino 18-55 F.3.5 5.6 VRII sharpness and higher contrast, visible without enlarging the foto.rnSicuramente is a great goal, but I'll have to change it. I can not trust to keep and change camera. |
user58495
 | sent on 06 Agosto 2016 Pros: Sharpness, construction, color pastes Cons: But nothing Opinion: Bought new lens hood with original yesterday morning: for now I only did some tests, but I plan to test it thoroughly in the next few days, during vacanze.Per now: solid construction, robust and refined, yet lightweight and Df is ingombrante.Sulla beautiful ... rnColori pasty, very good sharpness at full aperture, excellent since 5,6.rnMessa rapid fire, virtually nothing distortion, blurry and pasty morbido.rnHo increased a little contrast in tests with the picture control to Neutral habitually use and greater definition of micro details and detaches better colori.rnPer the price is stratospheric perspective and does not seem to suffer at all flare.rnConsigliatissimo those who do not want to spend a huge amount for the much more expensive F 24 1, 8. |
 | sent on 02 Aprile 2016 Pros: Sharpness in the center, price to be used, AF speed, weight and size. Cons: forfeiture to the edges. Opinion: I already have the Nikon 20 1.8 and on a whim I took the 24 outputs used to read and without obligation. I had put a lot of faith in 'perspective why having a D800E I noticed that little performance objectives are not entirely Sensor friends from 36mpx. L 'optical rather surprised me, very very sharp in the center with a decline at the edges not too strong for my taste. Already quite clear to f2.8 and f5.6 at its best. For a perspective you always behind the lightweight, space-saving advice |
 | sent on 20 Settembre 2015 Pros: small, compact, money outstanding Cons: nothing Opinion: purchased used model not D, made fantastic paid just under € 150 worth much più.Normalmente in ff with D700 use 20-35 2.8 I feel good, but with envi fixed when you have the time to frame it calmly another cosa.rnConsiglio all nikonisti looking for a 24 to make us a thought, even the new version AFD worth all the money that costa.Poi if you're lucky enough to find a used affixed, meglio.E 'light goes everywhere. |
 | sent on 25 Agosto 2015 Pros: Sharp at all apertures, compact, risolvenza also on digital, well corrected, distortion correction exemplary also on full frame. Af fast. Cons: Nothing. Opinion: Excellent !! Always clear at all apertures from the center to the edges. A distortion correction really accurate. Very little vignetting on full frame. I never had problems of flare but you have to use the lens hood. Excellent for landscapes and reportage. Versatile also on APS-C. The cost of the new is modest for the services can give without spending a fortune for version af-s F1.4. With a colleague of mine who owns the Nikon AF-S 24mm F1.4 doing tests on the same camera believe me, where is the difference? We were surprised, A must have !! |
 | sent on 14 Luglio 2015 Pros: Clarity, weight, risolvenza, extremely correct Cons: I do not know Opinion: The use of D90, bought used, a fairy tale! RnNitidezza good already in TA, small, compact, fast, short, full of virtues, and for what it costs used, a shame not to have it if you use the DX is fissi.rnSu a bit of a heresy, but it becomes a nice 36mm, and ye shall have often attacked as hood use one of the 50 AF-D 1.8, the diameter of the filter is the same, and at least protects better reflections of the original metal, that on DX leaves much scoperto.rnrnUn field must be avere.rn |
user52859
| sent on 23 Settembre 2014 Pros: af impressive speed, distortion almost nonexistent (I use it on d7000), color tones quite real Cons: none of APSC, only little flare that often there is also Opinion: I use it for almost two years on d7000 what about no aberration purple green (like the 35mm 1.8g) vignetting also absent A2,8 that and already great, but really very little little distortion, fixed with 1 to 3 stop f4 f5.6 f8 and superb flare you can find it in the evening a little or backlit but all optical suffer in these conditions is resolved with the lens hood does not include (i 4 euro on amazon) lightweight, compact and becomes an 36mm on APSC and practically not I take the car never really satisfied about d7000 I highly recommend it (as I do not recommend the 35mm 1.8g dx) vote in 1110 was forgetting the quality at the edges which remains unchanged I take only the center point and then reassemble and make any cuttings, perhaps af lightning because it uses the PTO of the machine but nothing to do with the 35 mm 1.8 g dx, only negative and that it has been misplaced under 200 pippi but considerarata the focal APSC and the quality of the optics in general worth them all |
 | sent on 12 Luglio 2014 Pros: Compact, excellent performance at all apertures, perhaps best of DX on FX ... often underestimated Cons: Hood sold separately Opinion: Used a lot of D90 where perhaps I preferred covering an angle of 35mm x speak. Optics very good at all apertures, beautiful colors and pastellosi typical of AF. Autofocus quickly and precisely. Compact and lightweight, often overlooked as optical GA or "normal" DX ... shame as it has no rivals on its price range (used on 200-220 €). |
user36759
| sent on 19 Aprile 2014 Pros: Compact and quality, especially on film, excellent resistance to flare, without chromatic aberration even at full aperture Cons: Not recommended on APS-C Opinion: Lens that makes more sense on the 24x36 than on APS-C, not so much for the field angle as for the lower yield on the reduced size. In backlight behaves really well, the opposite of the previous version D. Not natural, and not hyper contraed as modern lenses. However it is a lens to have if you have a 24x36 SLR, both digital and film. It would be nice that Nikon produced a DX version, as did Canon for its APS-C REFELX. |
 | sent on 04 Aprile 2013 Pros: Sharpness-price-quality image-brightness Cons: No hood (unforgivable on so short a focal length) rnpoca resistance to flare Opinion: I got this lens in its previous version (AF D) that changes only for the treatment of the lenses and flash synchronization, but are almost identical, the image quality is exceptional, the use of D7000, being a lens OLD STYLE is slightly less contrasted the current versions of G, but it is not always a bad thing, in fact, just a slight correction of the picture control in the car behaves very well, used is cheap and since the respective modern version of AFS is inaccessible this is a worthy substitute for those like me who like the fixed and does not want to compromise on quality. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
