Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

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
1 2 end

Archive 2010 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

ExtendedPuppet
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

Hi,

I am putting together a Nikon kit, after having taken a break from Weddings to work in Film. The last wedding I did, I was using medium format primes, so I am still trying to work out how I want to approach things now. I will cut/paste my current gear at end of post...

My question is, what do people think of the new Nikon 16-35mm F4 VR as a Wedding lens?

I am thinking about selling my Nikon 14-24 to purchase the 16-35, but I am wondering If F4 might be too slow? Of course if the 14-24 never gets out of the bag, maybe it doesn't matter if it's a stop faster? I was thinking the 16-35 could end up staying on the camera a lot more, maybe even replacing the 24-70 on one body. While using an 85mm F1.4, or 70-200mm 2.8 on a second body.

...Are you guys shooting altar groups and formals on a tripod? Because I was also thinking the 16-35 might work for shooting them hand held, dragging the shutter to as slow as 1/4th to pick up ambient, while freezing any subject movement with some off camera speedlights.

Sorry for the ramble, any thoughts?

Nikon D700 (looking to get a 2nd)
Nikon 14-24 2.8
Nikon 24-70 2.8
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VRI
Sigma 50 1.4
Nikon 55 macro 3.5 AI
Nikon 85 1.4
Nikon 300 2.8D AFI
Nikon SB-900 (will buy at least one more)
Coco ringflah
Quantum Qflash T2
Radiopopper P1 system
Minolta Spotmeter F
Polaris SPD100 meter
Minolta Autometer IV F
Big old Gitzo
Slik AF Pistol Grip heads

Apr 02, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Saad Syed
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

The wide end of both lenses is a little too wide for me. I shoot large group formals and don't go wider than 24mm on FF. 14mm has a lot of distortion. Also I usually shoot formals at 4-5.6 so the 2.8 isn't really used.

Apr 02, 2010 at 12:41 PM

ExtendedPuppet
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

Thanks Saad for your input.

Do you shoot your formal groups on a tripod?

(I was thinking not using a tripod would be faster shooting, but then using a tripod on groups would make it a lot easier to clone out bad expressions and blinks)

Apr 02, 2010 at 12:46 PM

ExtendedPuppet
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

Anyone else have opinions on the 16-35mm F4 VR as a wedding lens?

What about selling the 14-24 F2.8 for a 24mm F1.4 for available light reception shots? I'm thinking it may be a bit wide.

Apr 04, 2010 at 06:12 AM

Beni
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

The photographer for my sisters wedding used the 14-24mm. That thing at the wide end does nasty things to people anywhere near the edges. Really nasty. My dad was rather annoyed at how bad it made people look. My 17-40L is certainly not perfect but doesn't distort the edges as badly so I assume the 16-35 would be a better wedding choice.

Apr 04, 2010 at 08:22 AM

Sam Hassas
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

Apr 04, 2010 at 09:41 AM

martinezphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

The 14-24 has pretty ridiculous distortion at the wide end and people anywhere near the corners is a no-no. From the little I have seen so far, the 16-35 is worse. Of course this is absolutely to be expected from a wide angle zoom. And no, the Canon 16-35L is no better. However, group shots are best done with something like a 35, so the 16-35 may turn out to be a viable solution (I am waiting until I can see a review that I can put some faith in). My preference would be something like Canon's fantastic 35L but until Nikon comes out with one I will stick with the 24-70 always being sure to keep folks away from the edges if I am shooting at the wide end. My siggy 50 is also very good if I have the room

Apr 04, 2010 at 04:00 PM

alexscott57
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

The older 17-35 f/2.8 that Nikon makes is wide enough for me. My boss has the 14-24 and its just ridiculous at weddings. You might be able to put it on for 2-3 shots during the ceremony to take a mentally wide one from behind the couple and thats where I'd stop. The 17-35mm is a much more useful range and I find I dont have to change lenses as often because of it.

Apr 04, 2010 at 06:03 PM

phatnev
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

17-3 2.8 would make the best wedding lens of the three.

Apr 04, 2010 at 07:52 PM

trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

+1 the 17-35 is kind to older faces. It's my go to for receptions on the D700. The D3 has the 70-200/24-70 to taste.

I often shoot at f4 on FX for DOF so the 16-35 VR will get a try at my next reception. Love the colors/sharpness it kicks out.

Apr 04, 2010 at 08:04 PM

Arka
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

14-24 is way too wide for people. People really get mangled at that focal length as you approach the edges. I'd say that the 16-35 is perfect on a DX, but even that gets a little wide when placed on an FX. I used to shoot weddings and events on a 1D Mark II with a 17-40, and even that lens can cause some unpleasant distortion.

Arka C.

Apr 05, 2010 at 02:12 AM

ExtendedPuppet
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

Thanks for all of the replies, it looks like the consensus is that the 14-24 isn't really a wedding lens. The front element sort of scared me anyway. I wish Nikon would update the D700 soon, then I could sell the 14-24 to help fund the second body I need.

Apr 05, 2010 at 03:02 AM

ExtendedPuppet
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

"+1 the 17-35 is kind to older faces. It's my go to for receptions on the D700. The D3 has the 70-200/24-70 to taste."

Trenchmonkey, that is how I feel about the Sigma 50mm

Apr 05, 2010 at 03:04 AM

mosier
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

ExtendedPuppet wrote:
Thanks for all of the replies, it looks like the consensus is that the 14-24 isn't really a wedding lens. The front element sort of scared me anyway. I wish Nikon would update the D700 soon, then I could sell the 14-24 to help fund the second body I need.

I think the 14-24 is a fantastic lens for capturing overall scenes, such as from the back of the church. For group shots I could never imagine using a wide lens like that, but of course I'm the crazy one using a 70-200 at 200mm for large group shots

Apr 05, 2010 at 03:44 PM

Photo197726
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

I'll add my hat in that 17-35 ring. When it was introduced, it was the bomb, and now people seem to think it's garbage. I may be slightly softer than the 14-24, but it's made many, many, many saleable images for me, and nobody has complained about the IQ yet...

Apr 05, 2010 at 04:13 PM

Robb Mann
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

The 14-24 is better at 24mm than the 24-70. Now, if you're not shooting UWA anyway, why spend money to replace an excellent lens you don't use (14-24) with a good one you won't use (16-35). I'd save money in hope of a d700x later this year.

Apr 06, 2010 at 08:35 AM

ExtendedPuppet
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

Yeah I really need a second body, more than a wider than 24mm lens I guess

I was thinking if I got the 16-35, I would use it almost instead of the 24-70 in some situations, but idk.
Thanks for the suggestions

Apr 06, 2010 at 09:38 AM

Mishu01
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

I may throw a little insight here... :-)

You better save money for your second FX body. If you need a lens just for groups of people, you have a much inexpensive option: Sigma 20mm/f1.8 or Sigma 24mm/f1.8. I have a good copy of the 24 and I use exclusively on D700 for events in available light. These Sigmas are perfect for shooting people. I have no idea if they are good for architecture or for landscape but for events are really good if not great. I have on my shelve 14-24 but rarely use it in events... maybe at large conferences when I need realy wide open shoots to include a very large audience. But I get strange effects when shooting groups of people, even on 24mm, with it. That does not happen on my Sigma. I still lust for Nikon 24/1.4 but I do not think that I will agre to put so much money there when Sigma simply does the job for me. Eventually try to rent one to see it at work.

Apr 06, 2010 at 10:24 AM

tdong
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

For wedding I think 24 is really wide already. You can just shoot the whole wedding with
D700-24-70
D700-70-200

85 f1.4 and Fisheye for some special effect other than that carry light

Apr 06, 2010 at 12:04 PM

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

p.1 #20 · Nikon 14-24 F2.8 vs Nikon 16-35 F4 VR

Normally the 14-24 is too wide for people shots, but in some occasions when there's no room to maneuver you can use it. The IQ of this lens is fabulous.
The 16-35 has a more usable focal length.
There's room in my bag for both lenses.

NIKON D700 14 mm f/10.0 1/30 sec 3200 ISO 0.0 EV

NIKON D3S 16 mm f/7.1 1/160 sec 6400 ISO 0.0 EV

Apr 06, 2010 at 12:12 PM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end