fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · Advice on UWA lens for FX

  
 
gdsf2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


I am looking for some advice on an ultra wide angle lens. I have a 35mm f/1.4 for everyday use but I am looking for something wider, mostly for landscapes (but also for the occasional inside gathering to capture the whole room).

I am going back and forth between the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 and the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f/2.8. I don't mind manual focus at this FOV, but do really want the highest image quality for my new D800.

I would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks,

Jerry



Apr 04, 2012 at 03:10 PM
Uzay
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


Both are fantastic lenses can't go wrong with any of them, zoom has the flexibility but filter problems as you already may know, i have the Zeiss 21 2.8 and it's a fantastic lens, but if filter was not a issue and mostly shot landscapes i would choose the zoom.


Apr 04, 2012 at 03:40 PM
euua
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


I would go with 14-24 personally. Unless you will use filters, it will set you back 500, i would consider 16-35. In most cases you step down for landscape so you dont need 2.8 all the time.

I sold 14-24 only because I did not used it as much at 14mm - got 24/1.4 and never looked back



Apr 04, 2012 at 03:42 PM
Zebrabot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


distagon 21!

There's no large stupid piece of glass moving back and forth that can't be protected at all.






Apr 04, 2012 at 03:43 PM
gdsf2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


Has anyone tried both? How does the image quality compare across the whole frame?


Apr 04, 2012 at 03:45 PM
gfinlayson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


Another option is the 17-35 AF-S f/2.8. Sharp, low distortion (the 16-35 distorts horrendously at 16mm) and takes 77mm filters. I've owned the 14-24 and 17-35 - the 14-24 performs slightly better, but using filters is a royal PITA.


Apr 04, 2012 at 05:34 PM
utildayael
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


I own both the 14-24 and the Zeiss 21 ZF2. Honestly, at 21mm, the Zeiss wins hands down for sharpness and distortion. It's a really, really good lens.

That said, you get more versatility with the 14-24 since it covers 12mm of range and does [most] of that pretty well.

The Zeiss 21 is better @ 21mm. The Nikon 24 1.4 is better @ 24 as is the Nikon 24 PC-E but not enough to rule any of the three out, all three of those are excellent.

Zeiss has more contrast and more color than the Nikkors. Honestly, more color and contrast than any pro Nikkor glass I own. [and I own a lot]

14-24 has probably the worst distortion of anything listed but its also the only one that goes to 14mm. If you need wide without a fisheye, this is your go-to lens. [also why I havent sold it yet tho I will if I end up getting the Zeiss 15mm...]


Oh and filters? 14-24 you need the special Cokin or Lee setup [or one of the other options now] ... all are $$$ and hard to get in stock. All other listed glass takes regular screw-on filters no problem.



Apr 04, 2012 at 05:40 PM
gdsf2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Advice on UWA lens for FX


Thanks everyone. I went with the Zeiss.


Apr 05, 2012 at 05:21 PM





FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account