..............
As a famous larger say's "Its proberbly the best thing in the world" or was that Jeremy Clarkson :shrug:
If you think the 50 1.4 is good, don't try the 85 1.4 for the sake of your bank balance
Has it arrived yet Scott - 1st impressions if it has, does it feel like you've made the right decision :shrug:
Sorry for all the questions but curiousity has set in
no it will be monday or tuesday for def, cant wait, the only thing that diggles me before getting it is the card door(its not like the d300)Has it arrived yet Scott - 1st impressions if it has, does it feel like you've made the right decision :shrug:
Sorry for all the questions but curiousity has set in
yeah steve lets see some pics/Stop worrying about his and get out and use yours!
Stop worrying about his and get out and use yours!
& when I can find somewhere to go with it... Its all down to the OH due to her foot (thats my feeble excuse ) as she cant walk about for too long... Plus its not exactley been warm neither (for her that is 
)
hi guys, just bought a nikon D700 today. completely happy with it. but i need a suggestion of a prime. wanted to go with the 85 1.4G..but the price is too high for me
so i was thinking about the sigma 1.4 50mm / nikon 1.4G 50mm.
the question here, does the nikon produces lots of chromatic aberrations rather than the sigma?
anyone have tried both before?
thank u for your great brief review there. appreciate it. i actually just switched to nikon recently. i use to own the canon 5d2 n also the 24-70L f2.8. no doubt that these high end lenses are so good and it rarely leaves my camera body. the only issue i have with that lens is the weight
. anyways, i'll just try the nikon 50mm 1.4G then. see how it goes. havent bought any primes yet for this baby 
Dave, I do not have the 14-24 f2.8, but I do have the 16-35 f4 VR and think it a real beauty.
A few things to consider about each lens.
The 14-24:
1) There is no doubt that the 14-24 is the wide angle lens to have in this zoom range, or even prime range, as it is better than all/many pirmes in that range, but the 16-35 f4 VR is superb also, if used correctly.
2) The 14-24 is big and expensive and you can't use filters (easily). I use ND grads very often and consider them one of the most important filters for WA lenses.
The 16-35 f4 VR:
1) There has been talk about VR not being valuable for a WA zoom, but I can assure you it is very valuable, IMO. I took it to Europe/UK (I'm from Australia) on our recent trip there in July and found VR invaluable for those dimly lit cathedrals and churches where f13, ISO3200 and 1/5sec were the norm. I shot f13 for DOF purposes and if I didn't have VR, I would have needed to shoot at ISO12,800 in order to get a decent shutter speed or compromised on DOF and shot at a lower aperture like f8. The other thing is that if you have the 14-24, then you need to use a higher ISO compared to the 16-35 when in low light and your shutter becomes the limiting factor. So, if you consider that you may be able to hand hold at 1/13sec for the 14-24, you may have to use 3 stops of extra ISO to get the same shutter.
2) Distortion is there but generally easily correctible in post process. I have never been in a situation where distortion could not be corrected satisfactorily.
3) Filters. The 16-35 can accept screw in filters as well as normal ND grads.
4) The 16-35 is smaller, lighter and cheaper than the 14-24, and size may be important when travelling.
Yes, the corners can be soft if you are shooting wide open, but stopped down to f8 and by also slightly focusing toward the front of the scene rather than for pure hyper focal distance or focusing on something on the distance willy nilly, then you can counter any corner softness.
An example of inside Gloucestershire Cathedral:
D700 + 16-35 f4 VR @ f13, 1/10sec, ISO3200.
Crop of corner showing that it is not soft:
hi guys, just bought a nikon D700 today. completely happy with it. but i need a suggestion of a prime. wanted to go with the 85 1.4G..but the price is too high for me
so i was thinking about the sigma 1.4 50mm / nikon 1.4G 50mm.
the question here, does the nikon produces lots of chromatic aberrations rather than the sigma?
anyone have tried both before?
hi guys, just bought a nikon D700 today. completely happy with it. but i need a suggestion of a prime. wanted to go with the 85 1.4G..but the price is too high for me
so i was thinking about the sigma 1.4 50mm / nikon 1.4G 50mm.
the question here, does the nikon produces lots of chromatic aberrations rather than the sigma?
anyone have tried both before?
The 50mm 1.8 vs 1.4 I'd go with the 1.4 if I had the cash, you could even look at the Sigma version which gets its share of favourable reviews. You could always sell the 70-200 VR I and go for the VR II or get the 24-70mm f/2.8.
thank u for your great brief review there. appreciate it. i actually just switched to nikon recently. i use to own the canon 5d2 n also the 24-70L f2.8. no doubt that these high end lenses are so good and it rarely leaves my camera body. the only issue i have with that lens is the weight
kartracer said:
Sounds like you had a lovely time. I was born in Bath, so have a a soft spot for it.
