Bohemien Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
BSPhotog wrote:
Looking for feedback on AF speed and accuracy (particularly wide open) from those who have shot with one or more of these three lenses.
All three seem to have solid performance in terms of IQ, sharpness, bokeh, etc. They are also shockingly similar in size and weight (relatively). I'm planning to shoot primarily on my D500, as a kind of 35-ish mm semi-wide prime (see https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1525750/0?keyword=d500#14318495), but will be used on FX bodies some as well.
Thanks in advance for any feedback!
I love the 24G, it has an extremely smooth bokeh for a wideangle, is crazy sharp wide open (up close) and I just love the overall rendering. Look at the photos in the 24G thread here, they show what this lens can do. AF speed is ok, but maybe not like a 24-70 for action shots.
I haven't tried the other 24mm options myself, but there was a thread on the DPR Lens Lust forum 1-2yrs ago, where someone had sold the 24/1.4G for the 24/1.8G. She was very unhappy, because the 1.8G showed some pretty harsh bokeh in the wrong conditions.
I'm not a fan of the Art series. I had bought into the hype with the 35/1.4A, but have since swapped it for the Nikkor version. I have tested those side by side and yes, the Art is a bit better corrected (the Nikkor suffering from some serious CA) and really sharp, but somehow I liked the 35G's rendering better, the overall "look" of the photos. AF speed was pretty similar. I guess these findings translate to the 24mm options, at least the (24mm and 35mm) Nikkors are very close in design.
Of course, it's all a matter of taste and personal hallucination. I've seen some really good pictures from the 24 Art here on the forum (e.g. by Corey/Hardcore). Still, for me, the 24G it is.
Markus
|