I had the v1 of the 24L. Same reputation, holy until a new one comes along - as usual. This happens in Nikon land the same, so it is hard to do but buy and try. Apparently canons microlenses are in part to blame for the CA\'s. Whichever both the 24 and the 35 were not to my liking enough. Don\'t get me wrong, the lenses are great in some ways but not magical as the price and fanboyism would suggest. I had no problem focusing the 24 but the 35L was off and I could only decide if I wanted focus at near, mid or far distances with the mkii callibration. Sad, don\'t you think? Do I have to go try four copies? By F2.8 it was much improved, but if one can\'t get great results without post processing tricks and unreliable results where it is like flipping a coin - you can\'t be dead certain - well, it made me cool to extreme lenses ( I\'ve had all the fast canon lenses at one time or another and only the 135 was, to me, astounding and worthy of it\'s reputation) and a big fan now of F 2.0 primes as a much cheaper and smaller, less conspicuous, alternative.
I hope that the Nikon 24 f1.4 is worth its steep price. I\'m sure it will be worshiped irregardless. Until version 2 comes out in fourteen years?
Feb 09, 2010 at 03:26 AM
Previous versions of Pavel's message #8109642 « 24 1.4 and 16-35 VR OFFICIAL! »
