Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2014 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?

  
 
richardfromla
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I'm seriously thinking of selling my 14-24 2.8 for a 16-35 f4 because the 16-35 has a 77mm front and I can use all my polarizers and grads. I don't care about the 2.8 cause I'm always on a tripod anyway.

Anybody have any experience with the 16-35mm f/4G ED VR II AF-S IF?

Thanks.



Oct 02, 2014 at 12:35 PM
Dpedraza
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I'd say NO in big bold letters. Lol I've had both and I was underwhelmed with the 16-35mm at any aperture really. Comparing the two the 14-24mm imho is leaps and bounds better. Maybe my 16-35 was just a dud but the 14-24 is a much better lens. I don't know if you thought about it or it maybe too expensive fotodiox has the wanderpana system for the 14-24mm also there are some ebay knock offs of that too. You can still have filters

Steve Perry would be the man to ask about the wanderpana system he has a review on his youtube channel




Oct 02, 2014 at 12:53 PM
AMaji
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I bought the 16-35 over the 14-24 because of ease of use with my existing filters. It is no slouch but of course 14-24 is the KING. The distortion in 16-35 is higher, but correctable in software. If you already have the 14-24, see if you can afford to get the Wonderpana system of filters for it. If it is too much of an inconvenience/expense, only then think about down grading to the 16-35. BTW, the 16-35 is a great lens, so the "down grade" won't be that bad.


Oct 02, 2014 at 12:55 PM
the solitaire
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I have no experience with the 16-35 but for full frame it covers a really useful range of focal lengths and appears to be sharp enough.

The 14-24 is phenomenal. The focal lengths it covers range from wide to a little less wide. It's wide though. I traded mine against a minty D3 and a manual focus 20mm lens.



Oct 02, 2014 at 12:56 PM
richardfromla
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


Thanks. I bought the first edition of the wanderpana rig for a lot of $$ and it is a complete piece of crap. Too big to keep on the lens and so difficult to put on the lens in the field. They re-designed it but I'll be damned if I'll throw even more money at version 2. I have the polarizer and it's sitting in the case unused. I wrote to them asking if they'd discount the new one based on how crappy the first one was but I never heard back. lol

Thanks for the feedback. Guess I'll only use the 14-24 on cloudy days. Shame cause Canon's new 16-35 apparently pretty good.

Edited on Oct 02, 2014 at 01:00 PM · View previous versions



Oct 02, 2014 at 12:58 PM
Kell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I could have bought the 14-24 but bought the 16-35 right when it came out..no regrets whatsoever, smaller, lighter, less expensive, filters, more usable range, VR which I disagree with people saying it's useless on that FL...I'd do the same thing over again


Oct 02, 2014 at 12:58 PM
Highfive
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I have it, and love it.
No experience with the 14-24 other than all people i talk with who have it say its exceptional for it uses.

For my it was about finance/usability.

Why i love the 16-35 F4 is because its a very good walk around lens, the VR comes in handy more than i thought.

Love it for landscapes, i always stop down, so 2,8 is no use for me, other than astro who i do rarely.
I can use my LEE filter setup, and my polarizers.

The 14-24 is a special lens, but my reason for the 16-35 was simply it is more versatile.

Check out my flickr stream, plenty of shots with the lens there if you want examples.

Good luck with your choice, i can imagine its not easy



Oct 02, 2014 at 01:01 PM
Joseph.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


Just traded my 14-24 for a 16-35. The latter works better for me and for what I shoot. The 14-24 flared a lot, quite a bit heavier, and had limited range. However, the biggest factor for me was that I will have to reinvest on another filter system (about $1,000) when I already have a complete LEE system for the 16-35, so that was a no brainer.

Truth be told, I found the sharpness between the 14-24, 16-35 and 18-35 the same. They are all very sharp.



Oct 02, 2014 at 01:43 PM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I've had not one but two copies of the 16-35 and sent them both back - my 14-24 is just so much better. I know there must be some copy variation on the 16-35, but you'll never get my 14-24 from me!


Oct 02, 2014 at 01:53 PM
richardfromla
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


Thanks. Are you using the Fotodiox filter holder system to get a polarizer and grads on it?


Oct 02, 2014 at 01:56 PM
Chris Dees
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


richardfromla wrote:
I'm seriously thinking of selling my 14-24 2.8 for a 16-35 f4 because the 16-35 has a 77mm front and I can use all my polarizers and grads. I don't care about the 2.8 cause I'm always on a tripod anyway.

Anybody have any experience with the 16-35mm f/4G ED VR II AF-S IF?

Thanks.


That's just what I did.
Although the 14-24 is the better lens, but IMHO if you're at F8 or so the difference is very small.
The 16-35 is a fine lens and much easier to handle, better balance, less weight, 77mm filter thread.
The 14-24 was my best not used lens.



Oct 02, 2014 at 02:05 PM
richardfromla
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


Exactly my issue. I almost never use it cause I'm shooting at sunrise and sunset and I have to have polarizers and grads. Maybe I should start bracketing and blending instead.


Oct 02, 2014 at 02:09 PM
Gregg Heckler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


Not discounting the wonderful performance of the 14-24, the 16-35 is also a great all-around lens as well. Being able to hand-hold with VR at slow shutter speeds is super nice, and the smaller size makes it easier to store in your bag and to lug around. It is very sharp as well. Here's a couple of low res samples that may help.












Oct 02, 2014 at 02:23 PM
mshi
Offline
• • • •
[X]
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I sold my 14-24 for 16-35 because I always shoot between f/8 and f/11 and normally have no need below 16mm. I bought 14-24 new in 2008 for close to $1600 and sold it for what I paid for. It was no-brainer. And 77mm filter ring is must have for me.


Oct 02, 2014 at 02:32 PM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


richardfromla wrote:
Thanks. Are you using the Fotodiox filter holder system to get a polarizer and grads on it?


I use it just for the polarizer - split grads to too analog for my taste, I'll blend every time. Looks more natural IMO. The adapter is a bit of a pain to attach (I have the first one), but once it's on, I just leave it on all the time. If I don't need a polarizer, it's just a large lens hood.



Oct 02, 2014 at 02:34 PM
richardfromla
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I have a 24-70 2.8 so for me, it's all about that last 8 mm. Maybe I should learn to step back two paces. lol


Oct 02, 2014 at 02:34 PM
richardfromla
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I just have the polarizer, too, but I never use it due to it being so kludgy. Can't leave it on cause it won't fit back in any bag I own, and there's no way I'm taking it on and off.

I've been on the phone and e-mail with Fotodiox today trying to get them to replace that first version filter ring which is just unusable for me. Notice they re-designed it pretty quickly? They wouldn't commit to anything. Just want me to send it back for "warranty status", whatever that means, They wouldn't say. Don't much care for their Cust Sat, I must say.

You'd be surprised how many "pros" that have columns in Outdoor Photographer still use split grads and reverse grads. Some of us like to do it in camera.



Oct 02, 2014 at 02:40 PM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


richardfromla wrote:
You'd be surprised how many "pros" that have columns in Outdoor Photographer still use split grads and reverse grads. Some of us like to do it in camera.


Oh, I know a lot of people - pro and enthusiast alike - still use them, but my problem with them is they make things like tree tops, mountain peaks, lighthouse, and anything else that's above the horizon line look unnaturally dark. I can spot them a mile away and I think when things like the bottom of a tree looks bright but the top is black, it just kind of ruins the photo. They work fine when there's no obstacles, but the truth is, it's really not that hard to learn to exposure blend. Again, just my opinion.



Oct 02, 2014 at 02:46 PM
Dustin Gent
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


Do what works for you. Not everyone shoots the same stuff. Personally, I WOULD NEVER EVER trade my 14-24 for anything. I put a lot of effort and money into getting to primo locations (even better when the conditions are sweet), and I don't want to compromise my lens. I have done that for years, and have been pretty lucky I suppose.

I'll compromise on a body, but not a lens. I can deal with blending as it gets easier and easier. No filters natively = no problems. I can pick up a wonderpana if I so choose to use a CPL. Again, these are just my thoughts.



Oct 03, 2014 at 11:00 AM
lawa222
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Sell my 14-24 for a 16-35. Thoughts?


I've used the 14-24, 18-35, and just got a 16-35. In my opinion it is the 'goldilocks' wide-angle zoom, that is, hits just the right balance of going really wide, weight, and image quality. Plus it has VR (because I often shoot things like rock and mountain climbing with friends) and 77mm filters, obviously.

One thing that's worth considering: I only carry my 16-35 (previously 18-35) and 70-200/4 when travelling light, and that setup can get me pretty much any landscape shot. I'm not sure you can say the same about the 14-24 and 70-200, as you've got a huge gap there.



Oct 03, 2014 at 11:40 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.