Which wide angle FF lens?

R

rowland

Suspended / Banned
Messages
130
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
No
I ran a quick search, nothing specific...

I'm going to specialise in night and landscape shots, and I'm looking at 2 lenses for my D800e

Nikon 14-24
Nikon 16-35


I am trying the 14-24 and 16-35 at the weekend.

Are there any specific things I should looking for when trying these lenses?

I've read up a lot on the 14-24 and it seems a bit of a marmite lens.

I already have a 50mm and 28-300mm in my collection (so far)

any tips and advice would be very welcome - thanks
 
Last edited:
Is the 17-55mm not a dx lens?

The 14-24 is widely regarded as the best ultra wide full frame zoom available, so good some canon users have them with adaptors!
 
the d800e is not a dx camera, so I want a FX lens, I thought the AF-S 17-55 was FX
 
Last edited:
sorry Alex, I just checked, the 17-55 is a DX :bonk:
 
so I'm down to 2 lenses .. top post edited
 
The 17-55 is a DX lens and IMO is a waste on the D800 unless you are going to use it in DX mode most of the time.

I have the 14-24 and it is a superb lens and excellently sharp, the downside to it is that it does not take standard filters. Although they produce a specific filter system from this lens, it is a very expensive way of doing it.

If you need to use filters then I would say the 16-35 is the way to go
 
IMO nothing will beat the 14-24 for landscape, it's resolution is superb.
The 16-35 is considered by some to also be a very good lens but it is f4 to start with against the 2.8 of the 14-24.
The advantage that the 16-35 has over the 14-24 for landscapes is the wider availability of filters and at a reasonable cost - the 14-24 needs a special filter holder that is way over-priced and available filters to use with it are few.
My choice ... still the 14-24.
 
thanks Gramps, I'm quite looking forward to the weekend now, the 14-24 is in just hoping the 16-35 arrives too ... but I have a feeling the 14-24 is going in my camera bag :thumbs:
 
Waiting for my new toy's battery to charge (D800) but have been using a Sigma 12-24 on 35mm and my D700 for years. Yes, that wide can be an acquired taste and needs some care in use but I love it! Just hoping that it does the D800 justice - don't really want to fork out any more on the 14-24 (although that would give me even more low light capability!)

For some, the lack of a filter thread on the UWAs is a deal breaker but I rarely use filters so it isn't one for me; I'd rather have the width than the thread. The relative slowness is no problem for me either - one of the joys of such width is the vast DoF when stopped down a bit so f/2.8 would be wasted on me anyway.

Must away now to find a few CF cards... and enjoy the new toy!
 
hi Nod

I found amazon was the best place for CFs, and if you buy SanDisk they have lifetime guarantees.

I'll let you know how I get on with the 14-24. BTW when you bought your D800, did you get a bunch of vouchers ? Lucky for me, there's £80 off the 14-24 .. so it makes it even sweeter. (also there was £140 off the overpriced but excellent battery / grip unit, bringing it down to £140 ish)

I also have a d7000, they share the same battery as the d800/e, I found a camera battery charging system for my car, i used on my recent trip to the arctic - worked a treat
 
Last edited:
Ah! When I said "find", I meant just that - dig them out from where they are! I have plenty since my DSLRs all use them. I've got plenty of SDHC cards too since my compacts use them.

Yes, I bought the D800 from an independent dealer so have the vouchers, although I'm not sure I'll be wanting anything from them (unless I find I need the 14-24!) I've got a car charger that's supposed to be universal but haven't tried mounting the D800 battery yet. All my other batteries have pad type contacts rather than the slots but the charger contacts are (IIRC) slim enough - will try later.
 
I have the 14-24 and optically it is fantastic, but if I wouldn't buy one for use as a landscape lens. You are paying a lot for f/2.8 which you may never use for a landscape and I find it too wide for exterior work most of the time. I would probably go for the 16-35 with the added bonus of being able to use filters.
 
14-24 is the better lens for night photography but the 16-35 is a much more versatile lens. Optically they are pretty close unless you start pixel bashing! Personally I would choose the 16-35 for the extra reach and that I'll be able to use it in more situations.
 
today I tried out the Nikor 14-24 - it's an awesome lens, so that's 3 lenses now and my collection is complete (for the time being)

AF-S 50mm f.14
AF-S 14-24
AF-S 28-300

Happy chappie :thumbs:
 
Will be interested in your thoughts on the 28-300
 
28-300 is my everyday walk about lens. Recently coming from a d7000 with the excellent tamron 18-270, i feel the 28-300 is the FX equivalent. it's a bit brighter / crisper and although Ken says the 28-200 is "the" lens, I like the extra flexibility of the 300

I off to the forest tomorrow to have a play with them all - still grinning from the 14-24 though
 
I see that this is an old thread & probably off most peoples radars, but hopefully somebody will pick up! I am just interested to know if the 16-35 discussed above can be used with a 100mm square filter holder that has a circular adapter on the front for a circular polariser? The reason ask is that when I use this setup on my 24-70 at the 24 end, i get vignetting. I therefore assume the circular polariser is going to be useless at anything wider than 24mm and there may even be a danger of vignetting without the polariser at the wide end of the 16-35. Anybody with the 16-35 any experience of this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top