youie wrote:
Hi Kent,
I have the D810, don't have a 35mm lens, and i mainly use my gear for travel and family events.
Thank You.
For that I'd suggest a wide short zoom. You really don't need f1.4, and being able to zoom at family outings is a major advantage. I'm also going on my own experience and say that worrying about ultimate sharpness between two lenses is silly if you're not using a tripod. My top suggestion for you, based on what you photo, is the excellent Sigma 24-35mm f2. Sharp, versatile, fast, and even has OS (VR) which is excellent for family outings when you won't use a tripod. You are chasing the wrong squirrel here with the f1.4 single focal lenses. Remember--match the lens to the use.
Two23 wrote:
For that I'd suggest a wide short zoom. You really don't need f1.4, and being able to zoom at family outings is a major advantage. ...
Totally agree, Kent, and why I use the 18-55 DX as much as possible. Besides remarkable optical performance, the AF-P version has a blinding speed of focus (best of all my many lenses). Featureweight plastic build and $100 refurb price doesn't hurt. That said, I have the 28E for certain cases: light level is dire and beyond my remedy, I want lowest ISO for best IQ, subject is moving. Otherwise, smaller aperture gives better IQ and DOF in general.
rsway wrote:
I know this is an older thread, but if the nikon 24mm 1.4 was the same price as the sigma which would you choose.
I have not used the Sigma so I cannot comment on that. The Nikon 24/1.4 AF-S is an excellent lens for close-up environmental captures, particularly with open aperture. This is the very first fast lens that Nikon introduced together with Nikon D3. Sorry I don't have any sample images to share but I like the lens very much for it's color and rendering in close-up and low light conditions. It's doesn't have the sharpness of the latest Nikon 28/1.4E, or the last Z mount S lenses.
ocean2059 wrote:
I have not used the Sigma so I cannot comment on that. The Nikon 24/1.4 AF-S is an excellent lens for close-up environmental captures, particularly with open aperture. This is the very first fast lens that Nikon introduced together with Nikon D3. Sorry I don't have any sample images to share but I like the lens very much for it's color and rendering in close-up and low light conditions. It's doesn't have the sharpness of the latest Nikon 28/1.4E, or the last Z mount S lenses.
Yeah I actually bought a used copy from adorama but it had a weird AF sound so I decided not to keep it. Given the used price of this lens, I'm torn between this vs the sigma. I know sharpness isn't everything.
Probably the Nikkor; bokeh is a consideration, but also the direction the manual focus ring goes in, along with the OEM compatibility with distortion profiles and lack of drama with any firmware.
However OEM isn't a guarantee of top drawer focusing performance; I have the 28 f1.8, and although my copy is free of focus shift issues, my D800 regularly makes minor focus errors with it anyway as its AF tends to be thrown off by LOCA, which the 28 f1.8 has a fair bit of and I believe the available 24 f1.4 options for F-mount too. The D800 does this with the 85 f1.8G too, but in contrast it is sure-footed with the 35 f1.8 and other lenses with low LOCA. I'm not sure I've seen this documented elsewhere but it certainly seems to be a factor for me at least in mixed lighting. (Though not as bad as it was prior to the big 2013 firmware update on the D800)
rsway wrote:
I know this is an older thread, but if the nikon 24mm 1.4 was the same price as the sigma which would you choose.
I wanted the Nikon 24 F1.4 so that's want I bought, even at its full price. No regrets. I've not even looked at the Sigma 24. And for the record, I do have two sigma lenses - the Sigma 35 F1.4 Art, and the older Sigma 50 F1.4 EX DG lens. So, I’m not about poo-pooing on third party lens. I simply liked the Nikon's image rendering.
At the end of the day, I don't think you'd go wrong with any lens, but if money is a factor nothing wrong with the Sigma. My only negative about Sigma's lens it they tend to be bigger and heavier. It's why I'm staying away from their 50 F1.4 Art.
I've personally never bought a lens solely based on technical ratings. In fact, I've never even looked at the DXO ratings of any lens. I just review, look at real world images and go from there.
That said, I have the 28E for certain cases: light level is dire and beyond my remedy, I want lowest ISO for best IQ, subject is moving. Otherwise, smaller aperture gives better IQ and DOF in general.