How good is the 14-24 2.8?

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

FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

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

hijazist
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

I have tried a number of UWA lenses both on DX and FX, Tokina 12-24, 11-16, Nikon 12-24, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 12-24 and Rokinon 14. My favorites were the Tokina 11-16 on DX and the Rokinon 14 on FX.

Now I sold my Sigma 12-24 which served me good, however, it wasn't as sharp as I liked and it was very prone to flare. Now I am on the look for an UWA for my D600. Of course the 14-24 comes as a first option and I always heard how great of a lens it is. But I just wanted to know how much better it is compared to the Nikon 16-35 and the Tokina 16-28 2.8. I know the extra 2mm on the wide end makes a difference but my main concern now is only optical differences, sharpness, color, distortion, vignetting, etc... The price difference between the 16-35 and the 14-24 isn't astronomical. However, it is to me etween the 14-24 and the Tokina.

Filters are not an issue since I have a solution for that. I will use it mainly for night landscape and architecture. Another thing, for those who have a 16-35 f/4, how well does the perform as a general walkaround lens? How does it compare to other primes in the 24-35 range?

Thanks,
Hussain

Dec 12, 2012 at 09:36 AM

Chris Dees
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

You could do a topic search as this is a well discussed topic.

I own the 16-35 and owned the 14-24
IMHO the 14-24 is the best UWA there is, but for me the versatility of the 16-35 made me decide for that one.
Cons of the 14-24: weight/bulk, protruding front element, small reach, no filters
It was by far my best not-used lens.

Dec 12, 2012 at 10:31 AM

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

p.1 #3 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

I too own both the 14-24 and 16-35 - I keep the 14-24 because it's just that good. If I need the versatility (or filters) I'll pop on the 16-35, but the rest of the time it's the 14-24. Just plain sharper.

Dec 12, 2012 at 12:44 PM

trenchmonkey
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

Loved mine when I had it...save for the bulbous protuberance

Was a nervous wreck when
workin' the crowds at events with it, so we parted ways. My old PJ standby, the 17-35 f2.8
gets the call these days. Center sharpness on FX...is literally off the charts.

Dec 12, 2012 at 01:09 PM

Hardcore
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

I love the 14-24mm. I had the zeiss 21mm and the 14-24mm is everything the zeiss is and more except corner sharpness at f2.8.

Pretty amazing for a zoom! Now that I was able to get the fotodiox Circular polarizer, the lens is unbeatable!

Dec 12, 2012 at 01:27 PM

Frank_Maiello
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

I’m thinking that if you sold one lens because you weren’t impressed with its sharpness, the Tokina 16-35 could be more of a sideways move than the Nikon 14-24.

If you want sharp corners at f/2.8 and prefer to shoot on the wider end, it’s easy to recommend the Nikon, notwithstanding the price. The results it can produce have made it my all-time favorite lens. It does have a tendency to produce ghosts, but veiling flare really isn’t a problem.

Dec 12, 2012 at 02:42 PM

ironimages
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

This lens is steller! no question about it one of the best lens's in Nikons line up. The 14-24 2.8 was one of the reasons that I made the move from Canon to Nikon about 4 years ago now. The images that 14-24 produce always just blow my mind! it's that good!

Dec 12, 2012 at 03:47 PM

lxdesign
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

Love my 14-24! The best UWA lens I have ever owned and used.

Dec 12, 2012 at 04:08 PM

cohenfive
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

it's a fantastic lens, i only wish i had more instances where i could put it to use. only downside is the filter issue, but for most of my limited use that hasn't been much of an issue.

Dec 12, 2012 at 04:53 PM

Dwight3
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

I've had a 14-24 for maybe 4-5 years now and I've only used it a handful of times.

Not that it's not worth using, but I just rarely shoot ultrawide shots. The lens didn't really fit in my bag so it wasn't there when I might have needed it. For wide landscapes I generally stitched.

I recently got a larger bag and took the trinity with me to an event. The 14-24 was very useful indoors for large groups.

It's the best limited-use lens I own.

Dec 12, 2012 at 09:02 PM

snapsy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

It's as good as it gets for UWA FF lenses. Nothing compares well to it across the frame.

Dec 12, 2012 at 09:10 PM

ryankarr
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

I had both and felt the 16-35 was sharper, lighter, more resistant to flare and more practical. I only use UWA for landscapes, so speed was not important to me.

Actually I've had the 14-24 twice, figured I should give it another chance. 16-35 still won out.

Dec 12, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Lee Saxon
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

Hardcore wrote:
I love the 14-24mm. I had the zeiss 21mm and the 14-24mm is everything the zeiss is and more except corner sharpness at f2.8.

My experience with the Zeiss 21 was that it was a healthy amount sharper than the 14-24 @ 21, but probably not so much that I'd give up the flexibility of the zoom.

*shrug* the perils of sample variation...

Edit: As I was typing "the perils of sample variation," Ryan posted that his 14-24 wasn't as sharp as his 16-35, which is very much contrary to my experience. Point made, thank you sir. :P

Dec 12, 2012 at 11:16 PM

hijazist
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · How good is the 14-24 2.8?

The Zeiss is really tempting but I guess for my needs zooms are more useful.

thanks a lot for the great advice. It seems that the 16-35 wins on practicality which I am going to need, also the price is more tempting.

Dec 14, 2012 at 04:44 AM

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