Lens comparison: Nikkor 2/28 vs Distagon 2.8/28

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

The newly grounded Nikkor 28mm suggested me to try it face to face with my main 28mm lens, the Distagon.
There is a full stop difference between the two (the Nikkor at f/2 is one stop faster), so I did not try any wide open related test such as bokeh test.
I tried instead a simple shot at f/8, to check the basic qualities for a wide angle: distortion, corner performance, sharpness and color, in order of importance.

The shots are taken hand-held and this alone sort of makes it subjective - I did not care to make a proper test, just a quick comparison (and this is why I call it comparison instead of test)

Amongst the nicest features of the 5D, there is the possibility of shooting at a fixed custom white balance. This is perfect for testing color, because it gets rid of the machine's decisions and presets.
So i set the color to 5500°K and left it there for both takes. This way, it is like shooting with the same roll of film: all color differences will depend on the lenses only.

And in fact the color results are the most surprising. The Zeiss lenses have a reputation for giving a warm tone to photographs. Here, instead, the Distagon shows a perfectly neutral tone. The Nikkor lens, instead, delivers an image with a decidedly warm tone. I am used to subtle differences in color rendition by different lenses, but here the difference is huge: with the same white balance, the two lenses deliver a remarkably different color tone. As for saturation, it looks similar for the two lenses, with perhaps a slight edge for the Nikkor lens (and it would be the first time that I meet a Nikkor lens that saturates more than a Zeiss); but we have not to forget that for the way we perceive the colors, a warm tone photograph seems always more saturated than a neutral balanced photograph. So in my opinion the saturation is in reality equivalent.

Here's the two images, much resized to fill onto the page, just to show the color tone difference. Distagon on the left, Nikkor on the right:

As for the other parameters:

- Distortion
The Nikkor performs remarkably well. It is true that the Distagon 2.8/28 is not famous to be the most corrected of Zeiss wideangles (it is worse, for instance, than the 2.8/35), but yet is a Zeiss, and for the Nikkor to hold the distortion comparison is already a great point!
To my eyes, the Nikkor shows perhaps a tiny bit more barrel thing. visible especially on the building at left; but overall I would say that the two lenses are very close for distortion, and both deliver a good enough architectural image

- Corner performance
Here of course I would have to test the lenses wide open, but as I said, i have opted for a f/8 test because the lenses have different speed.
However, even at f/8 there is an evident difference in the corner performance, the Distagon being remarkably sharper and without vignetting, while the Nikkor lens is softer and even at f/8, it still shows a bit of vignetting.

- Overall sharpness
In all areas of the f/8 frame, the Distagon is sharpen than the Nikkor lens, without really a question. We must note however that the Distagon is a lens of the mid-late seventies, while the Nikkor here is a lens of the Sixties. So it pays the tribute to the age and the different quality standards of its time.

I will post some image samples for corner performance and sharpness, later.

For now I would like to conclude that although the Distagon is clearly a superior lens, the Nikkor still holds out decently (if not well in some aspects). The used price difference between the lenses in mint condition is of about 50 Euros. So in that case I would say that it will pay to fork out the extra 50 and get the Distagon.
However, you sometimes find Nikkor 2/28 copies in much used condition and these can go for pretty little. My copy shows much wear outside, but it has good glasses. I paid for it less than half of what I paid for the Distagon, which however is in mint condition.
So if you meet a worn out Nikkor with good glass, you can make a bargain. Else, it would not make much sense in my opinion to spend Eur 130-150 for a mint Nikkor when you can get a mint Distagon for 180-200.

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

Thanks for this interesting comparison, Orio!
BTW, are you feeling better? (Hay fever)

It does not surprise me that the Nikkor is pretty close at the Zeiss lens.
Nikkor has a tradition of producing excellent lenses.
And my Nikkor-QC 3.5/135 is at least one of my best 135mm lenses, if not the best one. It fights for this trophy with the Jupiter-37A, closely followed by the CZJ 4/135, the Pentacon 2.8/135 and (surprise) the Weltblick 3.5/135.

What we also have to consider is that a Nikon user will probably think differently about how much money this Nikkor is worth.
He will be glad to get such a nice and fast lens. One f-stop is a considerable step, the wider the lens the more difference it makes.

Anyway, interesting comparison, entertaining text! Thanks.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

Orio, I'm sorry to hear about your "prison".
Maybe you can find some comfort in the fact that I could not go on a daytrip either, since I had to work (I was correcting some student's tests).

So, although for different reason, we share the same "fate"...

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Here's the 100% crops of the two right corners:

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Centre crops, 100%:

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Oooh, they are not in same league! Man I am sad you destroyed Nikon image in my mind. Crying or Very sad

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

Oh, these are somewhat surprising results.
I expected the Nikkor to be better (maybe not as good as the Zeiss, but closer than this)...

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Well, Distagon is about the top of wideangle lenses, so it's not an easy comparison to stand.

on the other hand, several people reports that Nikon's 2.8/28 is a better lens than the 2/28.

I think that the Nikkor 2.8/28 would do better. Also, the comparison will be more appropriate between two lenses of the same speed.

EDIT: wanted to add that before, I tried the 2/28 with the 400D and didn't seem so problematic. But, 400D is a crop camera, so the corners were not the real corners.
This will become good as a memento. Never make definitive judgement on a lens after use on crop camera only. Always try it on full frame, either film or digital.

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

And now there is a 28mm f/2.0 Distagon as well

zeiss site
robert white

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

BobDodds · Joined: 13 Nov 2007 Posts: 87

I love my Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm f2.8. Thank you for making 100% crops to show how sharp it is. What an ebay value lens it is, too. I adapted my CZ Contax Distagon 28/2.8 to Sigma SD14.

The Hollywood f2 always costs a lot more, but how does it compare to the f2.8? And you could do wide open comparisons with that Nikkor 28mm f2, if you had all the time in the world. Just an opinion, then? I have a Hollywood f2 but have not had time to convert it to SD14. I just got a depth gauge and measured today to make sure it would convert to SD14, and it will touch the ir-dust filter but the glass will clear by 0.1mm. That's as close it could be. I might grind 0.1mm off of the metal surrounding the glass, to spare the ir-dust filter glass.

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

Laurence · Expire: 2016-06-19

Orio, the differences are remarkable. On the antennae images, do you think some of that might be camera shake?

Overall, I am rather stunned at the differences.

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

This comparative review at 28mm seems to show the Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 AIS as consistently better than the Nikkor 28mm f/2. (text in Italian). Particularly with smeared edges, which relates to the findings in this thread, too.

The 'pro' zoom 17-35 also comes off rather poorly in that test.

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Later model Nikkor 28cm f2.8 close focus (20cm) has 5 star rating almost any review.My favorite is 24mm f2.8 AIS.

mjkerpan · Joined: 15 Mar 2008 Posts: 56 Location: Boston, USA

DSG · Joined: 04 Mar 2007 Posts: 544 Location: London, UK.

This does'nt supprise me at all...I actively sought after getting a 28/2.8 Distagon after seeing its MTF rating (4.3) Shocked

, which is steller for a 28mm.
Finally tracked one down on ebay over two years ago for for £86.50, including the postage...More than I would have liked to pay but for the quality of this lens it was worth every penny. Wink