Nikon 24mm 1.4 lens

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
jsr4522
Forum MemberPosts: 97
Like?
Re: Nikon 24mm 1.4 lens
In reply to mfouks, 11 months ago

I have the 24mm f/1.4 and love it.  It fills two needs for me that my 14-24 and 24-70 do not:  large aperture for astrophotography and very shallow depth of field work.  This is the value the lens provides me.  Is it sharper than the 16-35 and 24-120 - absolutely.  It is great for low light indoor work as welL because you can get very creative with the shallow DOF.  The question you need to ask yourself is how often were you shooting at f/4 @ 24mm and what would you like to have done differently in those images.

For landscapes in the f/7.1 to f/11 range it's corner performance will beat out the 16-35 (which is a damn fine 24mm option).  Personally I think it's overkill for just landscapes - it's a special purpose lens.  For most of my landscape work, I see little difference in IQ between it and the 24-70 or 14-24 stopped down.  If you pixel peep or do very large gallery prints, it may resolve a bit better, but I would not pay $2000 just for that incremental improvement.   I have not found much value in VR for wide angle shooting (maybe just my shooting style) and that would not factor in my decision. Personally I would stick with the 16-35 unless you want to do a lot of night landscapes, street photography or starscapes.  Save the cash and stock up on some good super Tuscans, Barbarescos, or Barolos instead - very helpful for post processing.

mfouks wrote:

I have a d800(e) and was considering getting the 24mm 1.4 lens for some low light indoor shots.  I am going to Italy and a fast prime lens was recommended to me.  I currently have the 16-35mm f4 lens and the 24-120 f4 lens.  Interestingly enough I checked the megadata using LR and found that the majority of my wide angle shots are at 24mm.  I was just wondering if you think this would be too much of a duplication to get this lens or if there would be a real benefit to it.  In other words would 1.4 be a real advantage over the f4 of the 16-35 or 24-120.  Is this lens that much better than the other two lenses  at this distance in terms of colour, contrast, sharpness?   Also, is having no VR a real disadvantage with this lens?  I would also use it for landscape.

Thanks so much,

Marsha

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow