14-24 vs 16-35

Started May 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
sd40 Senior Member • Posts: 1,554
Re: 14-24 vs 16-35

For me, it comes down to these factors:

1.)  Walking through the woods, all it takes is for a branch to snap back or for me to fail to see something sticking out, and suddenly you wish you had a filter on the lens.  A lens with a lens cap on it all the time is a paperweight.  Offsetting its ability to take a filter, the 16-35's length makes it more likely to bump into something when walking through the forest.  I've done it already.

2.)  VR is a real advantage shooting handheld in low light.

The dilemma is real.  One lens specializes in the 14-20mm range, the other in the 18-28mm range.  One can go to f/2.8, the other has VR.  Neither does both.

 sd40's gear list:sd40's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Fisheye-Nikkor 16mm f/2.8D Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G +8 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow