kolen Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
RustyBug wrote:
Have you considered the Tokina 16-28? Long end gets a little weaker, but the wide end is pretty good distortion, resolution, etc. from what I've seen of test shots, etc. I shoot my Oly 18/3.5 for the wide stuff for its good distortion, the Tokina is on my radar should I decide to go wider. I recall it going head to head with the Nikon and holding its own ... besting @ distortion, from what I saw.
Like the Nikon, it is a chunk of glass, without as chunky a price.
Thanks. I've already bought the Nikon 14-24 yesterday (actually a 2nd purchase on the same lens after I sold it recently). The only reason I sold it before is its weight. Considering the Tokina is practically as heavy, I don't see much reason to get. And after searching for a few reviews online, I found that the Tokina is very weak in the wide end apart from the center, at moderately large aperture, and only get corner to corner sharp at F8.
Thanks for your advise anyway. I was searching for a UWA at about 14mm which is lighter than the Nikon 14-24 but with similar performance. The only other choices I got is the Samyang 14/2.8 which I owned before but sold it because of its distortion, and the Zeiss 15/2.8. I am very close to buy the Zeiss 15/2.8 but just do not have a deal. My target price for the Zeiss 15/2.8 is USD 2200 where the cheapest one is still USD 2400. I decided not to wait a deal anymore and settle with the cheaper Nikon 14/24 again.
My next plan to save weight is to find a good Nikon G to Sony E adapter to use that on my A7R, and that would at least make the whole package on my hand 400g lighter. But another annoying thing about the lens is front heavy, which is not comfortable to my hand. But so far I have to settle for this because there's no other choice. I hope the upcoming Zeiss FE 16-35/4 would be as good as the Nikon at 16mm and I would sacrifice 2mm for super light weight combo.
|