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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
  

Archive 2013 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...
  
 
Hardcore
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #1 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


jhinkey wrote:
This statement makes no sense . . . .


I have a tendency not to make any sense. Sorry if it was confusing. My wife tells me this all the time.



Mar 17, 2013 at 09:41 PM
Dustin Gent
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


Hardcore wrote:
I find it odd how some complain about the weight of the 14-24mm/16-35mm yet still use a DSLR. If your concerned about weight, why not a mirrorless? To each their own I guess. Just doesn't make sense to me. I'm happy with my full frame camera and the 14-24mm.

jhinkey wrote:
This statement makes no sense . . . .


I think it makes sense, however I didn't see weight being a deciding factor in the OPs' choice.
I am interested in the 18-35 - however I think the only way I would let my Samyang go is if I got the 14-24. I haven't used filters in years - so I have adapted to this omission



Mar 17, 2013 at 09:42 PM
jhinkey
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #3 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


Hardcore wrote:
I have a tendency not to make any sense. Sorry if it was confusing. My wife tells me this all the time.


Your statement doesn't make sense to me because I have a D800 and want many of the capabilities it brings to the table (including high ISO DR, ISO 100 DR, viewfinder quality, etc. etc.), but many times I am very weight/volume constrained. Hence I want lenses that are not overly large or heavy, but still maintain a high level of IQ. It's the lenses that take up by far the most volume and contribute the most to overall weight of my bag. Sometimes I take lenses that have a bit compromised IQ just for the weight/volume (my 20/2.8D for instance).

The 70-200/4 that I purchased was due solely for weight/volume even though I have the 70-200/2.8VRII.

I would love to have a 14-24/2.8, but most of the time it would sit on the shelf due to size and weight. Hence I take my 16/3.5 and occasionally 17-35/2.8AFS. The 18-35AFS VR is a prime candidate to replace the 17-35 due to weight and size alone IF it has good enough IQ.

I also have a m43 camera/lens (GH-2 + 12-35/2.8), but it's no substitute for a D800 .

So you may find it odd that someone complains about weight, but has an FX DSLR, but I find it quite reasonable because I understand their issue.




Mar 17, 2013 at 11:42 PM
Hardcore
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #4 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


jhinkey wrote:
Your statement doesn't make sense to me because I have a D800 and want many of the capabilities it brings to the table (including high ISO DR, ISO 100 DR, viewfinder quality, etc. etc.), but many times I am very weight/volume constrained. Hence I want lenses that are not overly large or heavy, but still maintain a high level of IQ. It's the lenses that take up by far the most volume and contribute the most to overall weight of my bag. Sometimes I take lenses that have a bit compromised IQ just for the weight/volume (my 20/2.8D for instance).

The
...Show more

That's cool. I understand what your saying. Personally though, I'd much rather have the best image quality I can for the extra 1.5 pounds of weight. 1 pound more if you stepping up to the 16-35mm. That is considering all other variables stay constant.

The 14mm vs 16mm vs 18mm is quite a difference when your framing a mountain on a hike or trying to fit a waterfall and it's surroundings in. 1 - 1.5 pounds is not, but that is just my opinion. If weight was my main concern, I wouldn't have a DSLR.

I do respect your decision and I do know 1-2 pounds means more on very long hikes, but usually the reason I'm hiking is for photos.



Mar 18, 2013 at 12:40 AM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


Dont get me wrong, but in case that someone wants best possible wide-angle lens, I think you need to change camp.

From what I saw, Leica R 28/2.8 V2 is very close to "perfect" wide-angle, thats if you count 28 as wide.



Mar 18, 2013 at 01:14 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



PeaktoPeek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


I think the point he was making comes down to would you rather have 5% better image quality and leave a pound/pound and a half of food in the car, or take a lighter lens that is almost as good and be able to eat for a couple extra nights -- hence stay out in the field longer. If the question was as simple as weight versus length of hike then a little extra weight would be worth it -- like long dayhikes, etc. Sometimes the difference between getting a shot and not is having the extra resources to wait out in the middle of nowhere for the right light. I totally agree that 14mm is much different that 18mm, but you have to have an idea of what focal lengths you not only use most frequently, but also what the situation you are going to be in is going to require. Hauling around the best lens doesn't mean anything if it isn't going to get the image you want, or if it keeps you from bringing the other gear you need because its huge. There is no perfect lens, even the best lenses have some sort of compromise that might make it utterly useless to one person while making it "perfect" to another. Its a silly notion to debate what lens is "best", since even with objective measurements it will still be a subjective opinion.


Mar 18, 2013 at 01:37 AM
handcoater
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


I agree, there is no "best" lens, only a best lens for you based on what you shoot and how you shoot it.


Mar 18, 2013 at 10:47 AM
Worldinlens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #8 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


Thanks for review. But for me interesting what about extreme corners at f/11 when we focusing at infinity? I mean 18mm of course.

Agree about 16-35, but for me disappointed that present some unique distortions of small objects (trees etc.) at the long distances near the borders, not in the center. Im not about geometry of course, this was a some kind of shape distortion of that objects. They was not soft, but not clear. I even can't discribe this... Maybe this bad position of VR unit inside, maybe bad copy... don't know.

Alex



Apr 24, 2013 at 10:35 PM
molson
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · Best wide landscape lens - the winner is...


Thanks for posting this, Butch. It's nice to finally see a review of the AF-S 18-35 that's not from a paid Nikon spokesperson.


Apr 25, 2013 at 02:55 AM
1       2      
3
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password