Nikon D200 and Nikkor 24-50 3.3-4.5 AF
Distortion is classic barrel which should be relatively easy to correct, I will shoot some brick walls, I think it is better above 28mm. But as the above photos show it is not too bad at 24 in real life and better than I expected.
I sold my 18-35 and wanted a 24mm for its compactness, however 24mm 2.8 are still very expensive used in the UK. I have been put off large wide angle lenses because of weight, and the fact that they look like telephoto lenses to non photographers and have had mixed reactions from the public. The 24-50 will be used mostly outside in good light where I would normally shoot at f8 anyway, and will use the 50 1.4 for portraits, so D version while nice to have may not be so important.
Also I am constantly surprised by the optical quality of these older lenses and enjoy exploring their abilities. Especially when they cost the same as half a tank of petrol in the UK.
Both the 50d 1.4 and the 24-50 rattle, but optical quality is not affected. This seems common on Af and Afd lenses and may have something to do with allowing fast focusing. The 24-50 seems even faster than the 50, and balances well on the D200/300. The AF version filters will rotate on focussing over its small range, The D version I have not seen. but it is 3 times the price from used lens dealers.
|Street Food 2017 by ziggyzag|
from Your City - Fast Food
|Running free by LassiM|
|1969 Oldsmobile 442 Resto-Mod by J Warren|
from O is for...