14-24 vs 16-35

Started May 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
GregWCIL Senior Member • Posts: 1,039
Re: 14-24 vs 16-35

razor123 wrote:

I'm about to buy one of the above Nikkor lenses. Both seem excellent. Most of my photography is travel so I like the reach of the 16-35 and the VR. 14-24 seems like it will be a bit bulky to lug around. On the other hand, the 14-24 seems to be superior optically with less distortion. So I have to weigh between portability and optical quality. The difference in cost is not a factor in my decision. Which would you choose?

I can't speak about the 14-24, but I can explain why I chose the 16-35.

First, I wasn't concerned about distortion. I run 100% of my shots through Lightroom and it corrects any barrel distortion. I can't really imagine someone buying this quality equipment and not post processing.

Filters were a high priority for me. I often use a circular polarizer. There is no substitute in post-processing for the clarity and depth of colors it sometimes creates. I haven't done much yet with Neutral Density filters or graduated ND filters, but they often are used with a wide angle for landscape shots.

I use the 16-35 more than any other lens I have. And the VR lets me shoot indoors with natural light--better I think than with my 50 mm 1.8.

Maybe if I had the 14-24, I'd be singing it's praises. One thing I have found out: I use the wide end of the lens by far the most. Maybe I'd like the extra width of the 14mm even more.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow