Since I introduced 50mm f1.2 before, I would like to introduce the second manual lens.
Ai Nikkor 24mm f2s and genuine hood HK-2
As usual, there are still many delusions, dogmatism, prejudice, typographical errors, mistakes, etc. of the manager, but I will upload it for the time being.
Later, we plan to improve the sample photos, etc. while correcting the mistakes little by little.
table of contents
Wide-angle standard 24mm?
Optimal combination with 50mm (personal conclusion)
Try using
Convenient notation for pan-focus shooting
Today's lenses that give little information about shooting
Lens reverse adapter
Lens image quality
summary
■
Wide-angle standard 24mm?
Before the heyday of zoom lenses, it was common for 50mm fixed focal length lenses to be sold as a set with the body.
Speaking of standard lenses, everyone complains about 50mm, such an era. (1980s)
The best combination of Nikon in the 80's, F3T and 50mm f1.2.
With a focal length of 50mm and a diagonal angle of view of 46 degrees, it has a moderate perspective and is easy to shoot. The price is not so high, and most of them have a bright f-number of 1.4. It must have been selected as a set lens because of its price, performance, and extremely high cost performance.
The 50mm is one of my favorite lenses, and I still use the old manual lens, the Ai Nikkor 50mm f1.2s. (Lens in the above photo)
However, if you try to shoot with a single 50mm shot, you will want to shoot a wider range.
What you want at such times is a wide-angle lens.
I'm pretty confused about whether to make it 24 mm or 28 mm.
The difference in angle of view is 74 degrees diagonally for 28 mm, while 84 degrees diagonally for 24 mm, and the difference is 10 degrees.
This difference in angle of view of 10 degrees makes me feel a big difference when shooting.
Zoom lenses have been around for quite some time, but zoom lenses at that time were not as stable in image quality as single-focus lenses, and were large, heavy, and expensive.
After all, you should choose a single focus lens that is cheap, has stable image quality, and is compact.
The next standard wide-angle lens for 50mm is 28mm, but when it comes to wide-angle lenses that seem to be wide-angle, I think it's from 24mm.
28mm is difficult to handle because the angle of view is not very wide for indoor shooting. (Personal impressions, or rather all personal impressions)
The 28mm is a versatile lens that can be used as a standard lens because the perspective does not occur strongly in terms of angle of view, so you can shoot pretty much anything with just one lens.
As you can see, there are quite a few cameras with compact single focus lenses that are equipped with a 28mm lens. As a representative player, the Ricoh GR series, which has been sold for many years, can be mentioned.
At 24mm compared to 28mm, the wider angle of view emphasizes perspective and perspective, making it difficult to use as a standard lens.
The surrounding area is considerably distorted.
With that said, the standard lens element has faded and it becomes a perfect wide-angle lens, so the manager thinks that 24mm is the representative of wide-angle lenses.
Everything is about full size.
24mm is the best combination with 50mm (personal conclusion)
When trying to unify the color and taste with my favorite Ai Nikkor 50mm f1.2s, I naturally wanted a Nikon short focus wide-angle lens.
From the above, I came to the conclusion that 24mm as a wide-angle lens is the best combination with 50mm, and decided to purchase it. Already more than 20 years ago.
Both 24mm and 50mm are focal lengths that fall within the angle of view of a standard zoom lens.
The angle of view of a single focus lens that cannot be changed freely seems inconvenient at first glance.
There are many advantages to using such a single focus lens.
Advantages of fixed focal length lenses
There are many reasons to use a short focus lens.
Along with the merits of old lenses, I tried to raise it as I could think of.
Attractiveness of single focus lens
You can create an image of the angle of view and the finished image in your head even before shooting.
Even when shooting, the result is often better because you will be shooting with more footwork in a fixed angle of view.
There is a merit that perspective perspective etc. are fixed and unified
A lens design that optimizes various aberration corrections at that focal length. Good removal due to the small number of lenses used, good color development, good sharpness
Compared to zoom lenses, it is lightweight, compact and bright.
Natural bokeh
The caretaker prefers to use a single focus lens for subjects that do not require zooming footwork, or for subjects that can be used if they move.
Furthermore, the charm of old lenses is added.
The charm of old lenses
Taste of uncorrected aberration
Softness that does not appear too sharp on the tick
Ease of flare, ghost, halation, etc. If you make good use of it, it will become a special effect that effectively expresses the subject.
Reproduction of the color development at that time by the coating at that time, unique color development different from now
Attractive as a product made by using a lot of metal parts processed with high precision
Since it is exclusively for manuals, the feeling of manual operation is exceptional. You can focus as you like with videos as well as photos.
Anyway, it gives you a unique and unique image.
The remaining spherical aberration gives a beautiful foggy effect
Surprisingly durable rubber knurled non-slip (Nikon Ai lens)
It is interesting because the uncorrected aberration creates a unique and unique depiction, and on the contrary, it works well as a special effect.
If you write so far, you can raise the appeal of the new lens as you come up with it.
Aberrations that have been corrected to the point where they can hardly be confirmed in higher dimensions.
Lenses with a resolution that is sufficient for ultra-high-quality shooting with an ultra-high pixel sensor camera.
Lens design that suppresses internal reflection to the utmost limit. Almost no ghosts, flares, or halation.
Lens surface coating, extremely high transmittance, almost colorless and transparent crystal clear.
Despite being used abundantly in high-dimensionally combined special glass, aspherical glass, etc., the price is cheaper than in the past.
It's insanely sharp, and its resolution performance is more than I saw the real thing.
I feel that the difference between manufacturers and lenses disappears as the performance of the lenses becomes higher and the more they are refined and scrutinized.
With a single focus lens, even an old lens has a decent performance, so it can be used in combination with the current full-size digital camera.
Aberrations that remain to some extent and halation and flare due to a slight lack of omission give the photograph a taste.
The introduction has become long, but for the time being, I will return to 24mm.
This 24mm f2 has 7 diaphragm blades.
The photo below is a peek from the back of the lens.
Ai Nikkor 24mm f2s f2.8 with 11 elements in 10 groups
I bought this 24mm as a used item at a Nakano store about 20 years ago.
There was also Nikon's genuine autofocus AF Nikkor 24mm f2.8, but I couldn't really like the brightness of f2.8, which is the same as a zoom lens, and the cheap design like a plastic model assembled without painting, so MF I decided to choose a lens.
There was also an MF f2.8, but I bought the Ai Nikkor 24mm f2.0, which is a bright manual.
The difference in brightness between f2.8 and f2, this is big!
The manager's motto is that in order to purchase a short focus lens, it must be brighter than a zoom lens.
The above photo shows the light blocking inside the lens with the Ai Nikkor 24mm f2s stopped down to f2.8.
I can see some internal reflection, but it is excellent as a lens at that time.
When I think about it now, I sometimes feel that the old lens intentionally leaves internal reflection because it leaves some flare.
How is it actually?
Did I just cut corners, or maybe I calculated and flared it?
Usability
Sit remild focus ring and aperture ring with clicks for each step
Most of the lenses at that time were applied as a matter of course, but nowadays it is impossible to dig into lens information and paint with more colors.
The aperture ring has a click for each step, and the operation feeling is good.
The aperture-linked crab at the top of the aperture ring is no longer needed as an Ai, but it feels like a symbol of Nikon or a manual lens.
A small hole is hollowed out to guide the light to the aperture value of the lens optically seen through the viewfinder of the camera and the small number in front of the aperture ring. I feel the delicate care around here, the Nikon-ness of the time, and the seriousness of manufacturing.
At that time, Nikon's paid service was working to remove the crab claws and fill the screw holes with decorative screws. (I think it was about 2000 yen) Of course I didn't do that.
This is because if you remove the Nikkor manual lens and this claw, it will look like a Nikon lens and look stupid.
Convenient notation for pan-focus shooting
A convenient notation for pan-focus photography written on the top of the lens.
Even if you don't look at the numbers, you can see at a glance the range of focus due to the difference in color, which is very useful when taking pan-focus shots with a wide-angle lens.
In the first place, you don't need autofocus to shoot with pan focus.
In the photo above, if you focus on the blue line, f16, you can see that the focus is about 38 cm to 1 m.
However, when it comes to shooting with high-pixel digital photography, it may be better to look at about half of this range.
Is this in-focus range, or the permissible range that seems to be in focus, and the depth of field correct?
The lens focuses only on the focal plane, but even if it deviates slightly from the focal plane, it looks to be in focus to some extent.
As the subject of the point light source deviates from the focus plane, the circular blur gradually spreads.
The size of the blurred circle and the blurred circle in the range that seems to be in focus are called the permissible circle of confusion. It seems that the diameter of the permissible circle of confusion, 31.4μ in the film era, is defined as 31.4μ, and it is said that a person with a visual acuity of 1.0 can barely disassemble the photo of a postcard with a diagonal of 18cm at a distance of 45cm.
If you take a picture with the current high-pixel camera and put it out on a large screen at the same pixel size, it will look very big, such as a 31.4μ circle.
By the way, the pixel pitch of the D800E with 36 million pixels is 4.88μ, and the size of the permissible circle of confusion is a circle with a diameter of 6.4 pixels.
32 pixels in area.
You can see that with the current single-lens and mirrorless cameras, it becomes a fairly large circle.
However, the essence of the photograph is the overall atmosphere, and in that respect, it hasn't changed in the past, and I feel that the notation of this pan-focus range can still be used as a guide.
It's quite difficult to shoot with the current lens without a distance scale and pan focus.
Today's lenses that give little information about shooting
Recent lenses have lost many of them because there is no distance scale and the pan focus display is omitted.
The camera tells the photographer
He seems to say, "Silence what I do! Don't talk!"
Or is it "Please don't talk about what I do !!"
The lens doesn't tell you anything about what's happening inside the camera.
A manual lens is the person who will always follow you silently without hiding against such a noisy and nasty lens.
Such a manual lens and camera shake are accurately reproduced.
(Although it will be corrected if it is in-body image stabilization.)
Manual lenses also have such a gentle appeal.
If it works, it's because of the photographer, and if it fails, it's because of the photographer.
I'm sure this will happen with the latest cameras.
If you can shoot well, it's because of the photographer, and if you fail, it's because of the camera.
Are recent lenses secretive? I'm just saying that the photographer is stupid, and I don't want to be tampered with.
Or, rather than telling such information, simple he is his best, and less information is more fashionable.
It's a for-profit company that sells, and it can't be helped.
If a stranger like this manager makes a product, the manufacturer will collapse.
Like the 50mm f1.2, the focus ring is smooth and smooth.
It feels a little lighter than 50mm.
Grease may become hard due to this hardness and deterioration over time.
Regarding the hardness of rotation, it seems that it can be freely adjusted by disassembling and cleaning again by applying grease.
A story I heard directly from a person who was at a former Nikon service.
Twenty years after the Ai 24mm f2s was purchased, its smoothness is almost the same.
The non-slip rubber knurling does not swell in the buyobuyo, and it still feels like it was when it was first purchased.
The rotation angle from infinity to the shortest shooting distance is about 90 degrees, and the focus stroke seems to be a little short for a manual lens, but it can be used without problems.
The shortest shooting distance is 30 cm, which is not so close to the current 24 mm, but the lenses at that time were almost like this.
Sometimes I feel a little unsatisfactory.
Lens reverse adapter
This lens is also a lens that can be used as a trick to draw the subject closer.
Not exclusively for this lens.
Here is the product used for the trick
Nikon Reverse Adapter
A 52mm filter screw is cut on one side, and the other side can be attached to the camera body.
An adapter that attaches the lens upside down to shoot, just a trick.
If you use a step-down adapter etc., you can attach a lens with a larger filter diameter, but the basic is 52 mm.
This is probably the reason why Nikon was particular about the filter diameter of 52mm.
When reversed, the shorter the focal length of the lens, the larger the image can be taken.
So, the 24mm f2.8 and this 24mm f2 are the lenses that can be magnified most using this reverse adapter.
Equipped with intermediate ring (PK-11, PK-13)
By using this lens reverse adapter and the intermediate ring, ultra-high magnification shooting can be done with fairly high image quality.
The way to use it is to use the reverse adapter in the photo, and even sandwich the intermediate ring.
Of course, it's not easy to use because it only focuses on a very narrow range at a short distance, but it's certainly not easy to shoot at such a high magnification.
When I took a picture of a ruler to see the shooting magnification with the above system, it was found that the shooting magnification was 3.9 times because there was a range of 9.2 mm on the long side.
If you shoot without an intermediate ring, the range is 14.5mm and the shooting magnification is 2.5x.
Both have a considerable magnification.
With this method, the focus position hardly changes when the focus ring is turned, so the camera is moved back and forth to match the focus, and the shooting magnification is almost fixed.
Normally, from the shortest shooting distance of 30 cm, it is a special magnified shooting method that can not be used as a bridge with sudden super high magnification.
Still, it's a useful feature, especially when you need a large shooting magnification.
Moldy hyphae crawling on the filter surface
The photo above is a photo of mold hyphae growing on the surface of a filter that has been left for many years, taken with the above combination at a maximum magnification of 3.9 times.
A microcosm spread out in the screen.
The photo above is taken without trimming, and you can see that the image is formed fairly firmly up to the periphery of the screen.
It's an old lens that allows you to freely set the aperture, and it's a lens that silently follows these special uses without complaining.
If this lens reverse shooting method and aperture ring are attached, it is possible with most lenses.
If it's just open, a new lens can be used, but the depth of field is too shallow and it won't be very practical.
Shooting with this method, the f-number becomes very dark, and it is difficult to focus because it is in the narrowed down state.
At that time, a reverse-use release that linked the aperture at the same time as shooting was also on sale to make it easier to focus.
I remember that the catalog had detailed information on the shooting magnification of each lens.
The manager was a Nikon-loving camera kid who read every corner of the Nikon catalog.
It seems that it has been quite a metamorphosis since ancient times.
Lens image quality
As for the lens configuration, the Ai Nikkor 24mm f2.8s has a lens configuration of 9 elements in 9 groups, while the Ai Nikkor 24mm f2s has 11 elements in 10 groups, and the number of lenses has increased slightly.
Many configurations for a single focus lens at that time.
I think I'm doing my best to make it even brighter and to suppress the increasing aberrations.
All spherical lenses that do not use aspherical lenses like today's lenses.
When I first started using it, I was disappointed that it wasn't a very good lens.
If you take a picture of a landscape near the open area, the surrounding area may be blurred, probably because the sagittal coma flare is large.
To be honest, I owned it, but I didn't use it much.
However, in the digital age, now that we can easily take test shots without worrying about the development cost, we have conducted various tests.
When I took a picture with a digital single-lens, I found that shooting a person, etc., and shooting with a blurred background gave better results than I expected.
As I repeated the tests, I could see the details of the orientation of the 24mm f2 lens.
The color is cool and astringent, the old Nikon color.
Since the color and taste are unified, it goes very well with 50mm f1.2.
It brings a good taste to portraits taken close to the subject.
The core remains in focus both in the open and in the peripheral area, so it can be used sufficiently in portraits where you want softness rather than sharpness.
Sample 1-1
24mmf2 open, shortest shooting distance
Sample 2-1
24-70mm zoom 24mm f2.8 shortest shooting distance
Above is an example of 24mm f2 single focus and 24-70mm f2.8.
This is the difference between the f2 and f2.8 apertures.
How about, can you feel the difference in the image of the above example and the charm of the bright old lens?
The appearance of blur is also very different.
Nikon's 24-70mm f2.8 is a popular lens for bokeh, but it's inferior to the 24mm f2. Is it natural that there is a difference in one aperture?
The blur is not too soft and naturally blurs, creating a unique atmosphere.
This also feels like connecting to 50mm f1.2.
The rear bokeh tends to be slightly two-line bokeh, but I feel that the balance with the front bokeh is good. The fluffy feel is like a soft focus lens, and it creates a nice atmosphere depending on the situation.
Perhaps because it doesn't use an aspherical lens, the spherical aberration that occurs obediently brings out the softness of the screen.
For the sake of clarity, the photo above is enlarged to the same pixel size as the photo below.
The lower photo shows the focus point of the upper photo at the same pixel size.
Sample 1-2
24mmf2 open, with a core in focus and a feeling that the surroundings melt, soft and beautiful
24mmf2, open, shortest shooting distance, the above photo enlarged to the same pixel size.
Sample 2-2
24-70mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8 open, shortest shooting distance
Below (Example 2-2) is a zoom lens, a lens released in 2007. Chromatic aberration is a little noticeable. It's cute that the position is different!
I think it's a zoom.
Compared to the above, there is no solid core, and it feels flat.
Even if it is fluffy, the old lens above (Example 1-2) conveys the texture of the petal surface better.
As you can see in the above example, this 24mmf2 has a core even at the shortest opening, and it looks like it melts in the surroundings.
It is as soft as a soft lens and creates a unique atmosphere.
With recent high-performance single-focus lenses, even this is flat in every corner of the screen, and it will be in focus clearly.
With a subject that blurs the background like this, there is no need to force the surroundings to be flat.
The soft but not too soft depiction and the image quality that is a bit different from the current lens also make this 24mm f2 feel worth using.
Starry sky example
Can you shoot stars with this lens?
I actually took a picture.
f2.8 is pretty tough, but if you stop down to f4, you can use it as it is.
The photos below are all taken with f4.
Exposure is 168 seconds, ISO 1600.
Taken with the whole image, 24mm f2 stopped down to f4
Overall, the image can be seen as it is.
However, it can be seen that the amount of light in the four corners drops sharply even though the aperture is reduced to f4 by two steps.
This is probably a harmful effect of adopting a small filter diameter for a lens with a diameter of 52 mm and a focal length of 24 mm.
First, try to put out the central part at the same pixel size.
The central part is the same size as the pixel
Even with a lens with only a spherical lens, the image quality in the central part is very good.
Very good impression.
Wide-angle lenses and old lenses that do not use aspherical lenses also have a sharp center.
Now let's look at the surrounding area.
A unique sagittal coma flare in the shape of a craft has occurred.
Compared to the image in the central part, a mysteriously shaped sagittal coma flare occurred even though it was narrowed down by two steps.
Much larger than the sagittal coma flare taken at 50mm f1.2 at f2.8.
Chromatic aberration is also seen.
It doesn't seem to be very suitable for taking full-frame astrophotography.
How does the peripheral part look like with APS-C size?
Radial coma occurs and increases toward the periphery
When the angle of view was narrowed to APS-C size, the image quality improved considerably.
However, it can be seen that the aberrations and coma that extend radially increase toward the periphery (lower right) away from the center of the screen (upper left).
From the above example, it can be seen that this lens is not very suitable for shooting landscapes as well as celestial bodies that require sharpness.
As a further note,
Color bleeding may be noticeable around the screen depending on the situation, such as the angle of the incident light on the lens and sensor originally designed for film.
Since it cannot be seen with 50mm f1.2, it may be a characteristic of wide-angle lenses at that time.
The filter diameter is 52mm, which is small for a lens with a focal length of 24mm, and as you can see from the above example, the amount of peripheral light drops considerably.
Also, you need to be careful when using a PL filter, etc., and if it is not thin, it will be easily kicked.
If I didn't force myself to stick to the filter diameter of 52mm, I would think that I could have made a lens with better performance and easier to use.
Summary
This Ai Nikkor 24mm f2s lens isn't particularly good in terms of image quality, but it creates a nice atmosphere depending on the conditions.
The 24mm lens assembled with only a spherical lens is not very suitable for shooting that requires landscape and delicacy, and the manager himself rarely uses it for such shooting.
I feel that the pin positions are slightly different between the central part and the peripheral part, probably because of the curvature of field.
I'm pretty worried when shooting landscapes near the open area.
Although it is a lens with such a habit, I find it interesting to shoot children, pets, flowers, etc. when shooting with a blurred background.
Aside from the good operability, in order to create that unique atmosphere, when trying to take impressive pictures such as children, I dare to put this lens in the camera bag.
In addition, the focus ring that can be operated smoothly and the aperture ring are combined, and the operability for movie shooting is very high, so this lens is used not only for Micro Four Thirds but also for full size movies.
You may be accustomed to the angle of view of 24mm while shooting, but I feel that the combination with 50mm is very well-balanced.
Nowadays, I feel that the focal length of 24mm has been personally established as the angle of view of wide-angle lenses.
Above all, the size of the lens is much more compact than the overkill 24mm lens of today.
It doesn't bother me even if I put it in my camera bag.
One of the real pleasures of enjoying old lenses is the large number of aberrations that the designers are trying to eliminate, but they cannot be completely removed.
How can we make use of such lens aberrations in our works?
Engineers at the time would have used their skills to create the best image quality at a reasonable cost.
An image that retains the straightforward aberrations of a lens that does not use an aspherical lens.
In particular, the remaining spherical aberration gives the photograph a taste.
This Nikon 24mm f2 is a lens that is worth using, although you can choose the subject.
Because I take sharp pictures of celestial bodies, landscapes, and ticks, I'm also worried about the overkill lenses of today.
Nikon genuine 24mm f1.8 was released in September 2014. With the G type, although the mechanical aperture interlocking remains, the feeling of moving the focus is a bit gritty and I personally don't like it.
The image quality seems to be pretty good, but in a sense I think it's okay to use MF as a hobby lens.
If you want to shoot sharply, you can just zoom.
24mm is the angle of view covered by two lenses, Nikon III.
It doesn't matter if you don't have one.
If you buy
I'm also worried about Nikon genuine 24mm f1.4, but considering the cost performance of price and performance, will it be sigma?
It's quite difficult for a hobby lens that costs more than 200,000 and can be used as a substitute for a zoom lens.
for now.
■
Until the end Thank you for reading.
Comments