WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds? - FM Forums

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

Pre-order new Rokinon 16mm f/2.0 ED AS UMC lens

Pre-order new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens

Bower 35mm f/1.4 price dropped to $379

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
end

WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

Chaz
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

I'm in the process of refreshing my glass line-up for our new D800 and D800E.

I'll be wanting to make wide-angle long exposures of water and clouds with ND filter(s.)

While I want to own the 14-24mm for a variety of applications, I realize one can't mount filters on it.

Thus, am considering the 16-35mm for the long exposure work. Is this an acceptable compromise over the 14-24?

How have others of you looked at my problem of wanting extreme wide angle with the option of using filters?

Jul 27, 2012 at 04:14 PM

kazinvan
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

Lee has a filter kit for the 14-24 but it likely isn't what you need. I don't think they have a big stopper for it or anything similar. The 16-35 is likely your best bet if you want a zoom, or maybe a 24mm f/1.4 if you want a prime (if that is wide enough).

Jul 27, 2012 at 05:42 PM

rd4tile
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

I use a low profile CP on my 16-35 and don't notice any vignetting, don't know about stacking filters however.

I owned both the 14-24 and 16-35 for use on my 800 and now 800E and sold the 14-24. My reasoning:

If you need f2.8 or 14mm(which is pretty cool) or less distortion at 16mm then the 14-24 is a no brainer.

If you need a lighter more compact lens with more range, VR that takes filters then the 16-35 fits the bill.

Yes the 14-24 is a tad sharper and slightly better in the corners but not as much as many would have you think. My 16-35 is plenty sharp and the distortion at 16mm is handled pretty well with lens correction. Since I handhold most of the time the VR does make a difference. In the end I didn't need both and felt the 16-35 was just better all around for me.

I recommend reading this review based on my experience he's right on the money with his findings.

http://mansurovs.com/nikon-16-35mm-f4-vr-review

Jul 27, 2012 at 05:47 PM

Chaz
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

kazinvan: Thanks for the comments. Will begin with the 16-35 and see what "develops."

rd4tile: Thanks as well. You confirmed my inclination. Will begin with the 16-35 and perhaps pick up a 14mm prime in the future if needed or possibly a full-circle fisheye.

Jul 27, 2012 at 06:20 PM

jhinkey
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

17-35/2.8 AFS is also a contender, especially if you are not going to use it wide open 9ven then it's still pretty good on the D800).

I thought I'd be selling mine when I got the D800, but it's still around . . .

Jul 27, 2012 at 06:22 PM

Bond
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

I'm on the cusp of buying a 14-24 for long exposures (yup, clouds and water) on my D700.

My concern with the 16-35 is the distortion on the wide end. Once corrected at 16mm, how much FoV do you actually lose? Do you end up with 18mm FoV equivalent undistorted?

Jul 27, 2012 at 07:15 PM

Chaz
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

Bond wrote:
I'm on the cusp of buying a 14-24 for long exposures(yup, clouds and water) on my D700.

How will you gain long exposure without ND filter?

jhinkey: Thanks for the comment. I'm wanting a bit wider than 17mm and was really hoping for 14. Thus, even 16mm may be a compromise.

Jul 27, 2012 at 07:25 PM

supergimp
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

I waffled back and forth, longing for (and prepared to buy) the 14-24 for my D800E but in the end, I chose the 16-35. The advantages of filters, VR, and general good feedback from users led me to save the money. I just didn't have enough to justify the 14-24 given that I don't shoot wide all that often and when I do, like this OP, I like to use ND.

Jul 27, 2012 at 07:44 PM

MikeW
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

Hitech has their "big stopper" for the SW150 filter adaptor. The 14-24 is a sweet piece of glass but I think for peace of mind I'd grab the 16-35 again. The front element always made me over protective & is one more distraction you have to contend with. But it is great glass.

Jul 27, 2012 at 08:01 PM

Bond
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

Chaz wrote:
How will you gain long exposure without ND filter?

I'll just wait until it's dark enough.

I've thought about getting the Lee adapter or the like. Even just buying a 150mm filter and holding it in front of the lens to start. Also not buying exclusively for long exposure.

Jul 27, 2012 at 08:04 PM

Zichar
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

Hitech also makes custom filters if you contact them
I've a 6-stop via that route

Jul 28, 2012 at 01:58 AM

Steve Perry
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

I think the 16-35 is probably your best bet too. However, like Bond above I personally stick with the 14-24 and hang around till it's dark enough.

Jul 28, 2012 at 02:05 AM

Chaz
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · WA Lens(es) for Very Long Exposure Water/Clouds?

Thanks to all for comments and suggestions. Helpful and appreciated!

Jul 28, 2012 at 02:58 AM

end
FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell end