Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S vs. Zeiss Distagon 28mm f/2.0

[@ZeekEOSZ]

Im a Zeiss fan (obviously), but looking at these examples the Nikkor seems to render highlights better if you look at the highlighted building shots. Interesting.

[@Beejtube78]

My thoughts exactly.

[@kalenderquantentunnel9411]

The exposures are slightly different which explains most of the differences.

[@MarcusRobbin]

I like the quote "The Zeiss renders unnoticeably better". Nikkors absolutely rock! The whole Zeiss-hype is simply pure imagination.

[@alexanderpopov4691]

I own both lenses for years. And you would be fine with any of them. Which one would I keep personally, if I have to decide between the two? Easily, Zeiss! Which one would I recommend to purchase - Nikon.

[@us1091]

great video , exactly what you said in this video , only concern about the price and the weight otherwise take the Zeiss , the sharpness the micro contrasts the color rendition,,,, awesome.... love it !!

[@tarjazz1]

Two sweet lenses! I use that Ai-S Nikkor 28/2.8, which is a redesigned optical and cosmetic upgrade to the also excellent older Ai version.

[@timv6715]

+2, the Nikkor renders better in these images in terms of separation of detail and highlights that pop.

[@linjicakonikon7666]

The Nikkor really outperforms the Zeiss here. No question. This video obvious suffers from the narrator who makes declarative pronouncements that go counter to the obvious evidence. I love both Zeiss and Nikkor lenses. In this case the Nikkor clearly wins.

[@beslemeto]

Nikkor looks much better and natural!

[@Narsuitus]

Over the years, I have used 28mm Nikon, Pentax, Contax, Fuji, and Vivitar prime lenses on full-frame cameras. My Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 AIS produced such high-quality images that it became the standard against which all others were judged. In an attempt to raise the standard, I purchased a Zeiss 28mm f/2 ZF Distagon. To my surprise, at the same apertures, the Zeiss images and the Nikon images were equal in quality. I was not able to find a higher standard until I compared 28mm equivalent images from a 6x9cm medium format Fuji rangefinder.

[@TCMx3]

The Zeiss Otus will beat the Nikkor at equivalent apertures but at some point we gotta say enough is enough with the size of some of these lenses. That lens weighs >1300g. The Z mount 24/1.8S and 24-70/f2.8S are probably also superior but at a very big size/weight penalty. Other brands have such lenses in their current lineup. Then Leica has the 28 APO summicron on the L Mount, which is already diffraction limited at f5.6 in the center. It's also huge. And expensive even in comparison the Otus. That you have to go to such extremes to materially better a tiny 1980s lens speaks to the quality of its design. If you are shooting 35mm film, I doubt there's any point to trying to get a higher resolution lens than the Nikkor anyway. Like you said, 6x9 can beat it.

[@kalenderquantentunnel9411]

I never owned the 2/28 mm Distagon but the 2.8/28 mm Ais and had impressive results from it even on the D800's 36 MPix. From what I see I suppose the Zeiss has a bit more clarity of fine detail and takes the cake in this setup but I know the Nikkor is good enough for me any day and stands out quite a bit among Nikons other moderate wideangles in AIs-mount. With 35 mm I'd prefer the my 2/35 Distagon without thinking twice if I still had it. I also owned two Nikkor 2/35, one AI and one AIs and the difference is well worth the expense for me. I used the 2/35 Nikkor Ais until the mechanics were worn beyond repair and its not in the same league as the Distagon I replaced it with.

[@iprosopon9868]

You should have tested close focus. The reason to buy the Nikkor is it's one of their lenses with their sophisticated "CRC" (Close Range Correction) that has a floating element so that image sharpness is consistent regardless of distance to subject. It is also practically a macro lens, allowing focus an inch or two from the subject.

[@sergebonnet5294]

one of the best thing is the Nikon can do macro pictures !! just amazing lense ever made (like the elmarit 28mm F2.8 but it's up to 2000 usd !!)

[@randallstewart175]

Have to wonder how the Zeiss would compare with the Nikkor 28mm 2.0 Ai-S? It's tested as significantly better than the 2,8, which is a very good lens itself.

[@Astro_Aladfar]

On opticallimits.com they tested the Nikkor 28mm f/2, f/2.8 ai-s and f/2.8D on Nikon D200. They also tested the f/2.8D and Distagon 28mm f/2 on both Nikon D3x and D7000.

[@cheryl9278]

helpful! thanks for taking the time to make this

[@sergebonnet5294]

Why dont you put the speed and the F number to see why the zeiss seems more bright ? Exposition is not the same

[@quiztasiarocks]

I would be using one of these for video work. Would you say the f2.8 on the Nikkor provides enough for good exposure? Is it worth it to upgrade to the F2 Ai?

[@SteadyRolling]

It depends upon how much you wish to follow the trend towards shallow depth of field, which could also be implied by your video subjects. Generally, the shallower the depth of field, the more difficult video capture becomes, because the talent might have a tendency to move towards and away from the camera, which would in turn, cause him/her to fall out of focus. For a still shot, with the right background, a lower f-stop can work. f/2.8 is probably a good compromise for most of these types of situations. You'll get a good amount of blurring of the background, but mostly without the other difficulties. Note: James Bond shoots everything at f/5.6, but those are big screens, so the background blurring is accentuated by the scope of the images, which leaves open the benefits of shooting at f/5.6. Watch a few scenes, and you'll see what I mean. It doesn't matter which. My understanding is that they have always done this.

[@celblau5336]

I love my Ais 28mm f/2.8 in 2019

[@SteadyRolling]

Good to hear.

[@Hodgojr]

thats sick

[@celblau5336]

@@Hodgojr No!, it's a Nikon!, it's strong, very strong!, 💕

[@andrewsDoc938]

Well i am still loving my 28mm Ai-s in 2020 and def beyond. It's a gem on my D800!!

[@willapanews9761]

You should be comparing the Nikkor 28mm f2 with Ziess 28mm f2.

[@GBB70]

Nice comparison. Zeiss is truly the winner here.

[@jaceleroy402]

Based on the video the Nikkor looks as good and better in all the shots.

[@i_n_c_r_y_p_t_o]

Agreed. Almost significantly.

[@mrsusan893]

Nikon looks better

[@Hodgojr]

this is lit

[@Stop-All-War]

● Nikkor is better in these photos...obviously. Zeiss looks washed-out in colours & LESS contrasty

[@kinhungchan7871]

Nikon ais 28/2.8 is not very good for landscape photo as its micro (Use ai 28/2.8 instead).

[@davidkachel]

You are comparing handheld images, making your "tests" utterly meaningless. What you really tested was how steadily you can hold a camera. You flunked!

[@myblueandme]

Zeiss is carrying a green tint. Nikon is more acceptable

[@Milan-cf1xe]

Good if you have a camera which is too magenta like Panasonic