Reading mode: Light Dark

Need your help for Nikon 14-24mm

Go to last post
calson said:
I would look at it exactly opposite and say that with a full frame camera the 24-70mm f2.8 is plenty wide enough. The 14-24mm is a fantastic lens but with only a 12mm zoom range it is the most limited zoom lens you can buy. It also will not accept a filter. Even the 17-35mm f2.8 would be a better choice for most photographers.
Click to expand...
Also, the 14-24mm is not good with flare and ghosting. That is much better controlled on the 17-35mm. However, the 17-35 is not as sharp as the 14-24. Pay your money and pick your poison. ;-)

The 24-70mm is an excellent lens, but it is weakest at 24mm. If you are going to use it primarily at the wide end, you may want to take that into consideration.
--
Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html
 
Based on feedback I've read on the forums and how often I see used copies for sale it's just not a focal length that many who own it grow into. I love the lens myself and use it all the time and can't wait to throw it on a D800.

 
calson said:
I would look at it exactly opposite and say that with a full frame camera the 24-70mm f2.8 is plenty wide enough. The 14-24mm is a fantastic lens but with only a 12mm zoom range it is the most limited zoom lens you can buy. It also will not accept a filter. Even the 17-35mm f2.8 would be a better choice for most photographers.
Click to expand...
That turns out not to be the case.

While the numbers do appear to indicate a limited range, on a wide angle zoom lens those 12mm make a world of difference to the angle of view that you get to see.

Having owned both the 17-35 and the 14-24 I can say that if you truly care about the images you make you'll choose the 14-24.

The 17-35 is not a bad lens by any means, but the 14-24 is in a class by itself and again, yes those 3mm do make a difference on the wide end of things.

Bill F

https://picasaweb.google.com/faulknerstudios
 
Mick5 said:
Hi iam not a pro its just hobby i used Canon only never used nikon, but last month i sold my canon gears and switching to Nikon Pr-ordered D800 My budget is allows me to buy one lens along body.

As D800 can works Dx and FX mode if i buy Nikon 14-24mm lens would it serve me in FX mode 14-24mm and DX 36-105mm ? then i dont need 24-70mm.
Thanks
Click to expand...
If you buy only one lens, make it a 50mm prime.
 
I have 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 VR2 with D700. I can tell you majority of the shots are on 24-70 and 70-200. 70-200 is the sharpest among them. I seldom use 14-24. Only like once in 2-3 months.

So if you are going to buy one lens first, I would recommend 24-70 first. All are great lens. Just that 24-70 might be more practical if you are only getting one of the lens first.

14-24 will have distortions as well as the inability to take filters might bother some people.
 
I've been considering the 14-24mm. almost pulled the trigger on buying it a few times. After reading this thread Im wondering if its the lens I really want. I plan on making the move to FX soon and I'd like something that allows landscape shots, however, if it doesn't take filters that's also an issue. I wonder if the 24-70 would be wide enough.
 
Major Major said:
I've been considering the 14-24mm. almost pulled the trigger on buying it a few times. After reading this thread Im wondering if its the lens I really want. I plan on making the move to FX soon and I'd like something that allows landscape shots, however, if it doesn't take filters that's also an issue. I wonder if the 24-70 would be wide enough.
Click to expand...
The 14-24 is an amazing lens and optically superb, competes with primes in it's range. It was the main reason i moved to FX. The extreme wide angle opens up completely new photographic opportunities.

It is clearly my second most used lens after the 24-70. And the 12-24 is the most fun lens i can imagine.

--
Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt
 
I am finally making the jump to fx (D800). I will, in the short term, keep my 10-24 and shoot in dx mode. My dilemma is the choice between the 24-70 and 24-120. My gut tells me to go with the 24-70 (maybe because I have an 85 1.8 & my wonderful 180 2.8) but there are always those that keep nagging about how it needs an upgrade.
 
Hi!

I was at Yosemite this week trying to shoot the (currently puny!) Horsetail Falls:

Nikon D3 ,Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED AF-S VR
1/50s f/4.0 at 200.0mm iso400



When the light began to fade and I popped on the 14-24:

Nikon D3 ,Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
5s f/2.8 at 14.0mm iso1600



It was nice having the 14 mm/FX coverage.

Some more 14-24 shots here:
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/nikon_1424_pictures&page=all

RB

http://www.dpreview.com/members/2305099006/challenges
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile
 
that you could be spending so much money on photo gear and have such apparently little fundamental knowledge of what the gear specification means .... but knock yourself out $$$ and enjoy - if that is the correct term
 
HyperCypher said:
that you could be spending so much money on photo gear and have such apparently little fundamental knowledge of what the gear specification means .... but knock yourself out $$$ and enjoy - if that is the correct term
Click to expand...
Hi Fred,

I hear you!

I also find it amazing that folks will buy a high end DSLR and then get only one lens.

Unless someone has a very specific and narrow subject matter or style, it's hard to understand.

RB

http://www.dpreview.com/members/2305099006/challenges
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile
 
Well, when I bought my first DSLR it was a new D2h. I bought one simple lens, a 24-85 so I could at least get started.

I figured that it was better buying one relatively inexpensive lens and continue researching exactly what my hobby would need than simply trying to buy a spectrum of lenses with little or no knowledge.

Once I got my bearings I started buying really useful glass and and also determined that it would also be all FX glass. That has since payed off now that I recently bought a D700.

I don't know what this guy had prior to ordering a D800 or what his real intents are, but it does seem that he shot most of his wad on the body.
 
user_name said:
Well, when I bought my first DSLR it was a new D2h. I bought one simple lens, a 24-85 so I could at least get started.
Click to expand...
user_name said:
I figured that it was better buying one relatively inexpensive lens and continue researching exactly what my hobby would need than simply trying to buy a spectrum of lenses with little or no knowledge.
Click to expand...
user_name said:
Once I got my bearings I started buying really useful glass and and also determined that it would also be all FX glass. That has since payed off now that I recently bought a D700.
Click to expand...
user_name said:
I don't know what this guy had prior to ordering a D800 or what his real intents are, but it does seem that he shot most of his wad on the body.
Click to expand...
Hi!

I agree that your getting a relatively inexpensive , mid-range zoom , as a starting point for your D2H makes sense.

But would you have bought an expensive , ultrawide angle as your only lens?
Seems a little weird.....

BTW, I also had a D2H...what a great camera (for its time).

Best Regards,

RB

http://www.dpreview.com/members/2305099006/challenges
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile
 
He has some knowledge. Reading the OP post, he sold his Canon gear to switch to Nikon. Probably made some cash there, even as a hobbyist.

So that counts for something. Could be his niche was architecture which that lens certainly fills more than a mid-range or tele.

Mack
 
RBFresno said:
RBFresno said:
Well, when I bought my first DSLR it was a new D2h. I bought one simple lens, a 24-85 so I could at least get started.
Click to expand...
RBFresno said:
I figured that it was better buying one relatively inexpensive lens and continue researching exactly what my hobby would need than simply trying to buy a spectrum of lenses with little or no knowledge.
Click to expand...
RBFresno said:
Once I got my bearings I started buying really useful glass and and also determined that it would also be all FX glass. That has since payed off now that I recently bought a D700.
Click to expand...
RBFresno said:
I don't know what this guy had prior to ordering a D800 or what his real intents are, but it does seem that he shot most of his wad on the body.
Click to expand...
Hi!

I agree that your getting a relatively inexpensive , mid-range zoom , as a starting point for your D2H makes sense.

But would you have bought an expensive , ultrawide angle as your only lens?
Seems a little weird.....

BTW, I also had a D2H...what a great camera (for its time).

Best Regards,

RB
Click to expand...
No, I would not buy only one lens, even an expensive one. I would be thinking of some type of roadmap to follow. It may mean buying one lens at a time, but I would have some form of a goal for a minimum compliment of lenses.

So, if I already knew what that roadmap was I might start with the most useful lens and build from that as funds became available.

I still have my D2H and the even better D2Hs that I just can't get rid of. I am loving the D700, but the pro body of the D2H and its own way of rendering color is still endearing to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top