16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Started Feb 24, 2010 | Discussions
Grig
Grig Senior Member • Posts: 2,313
16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Hi there,

This is my unscientific test I am sure many want to see... I feel that I've got a very good walk around lens as well as perfect wedding duo lens (along with 70-200VR-II)... 14-24 will be used for interiors and architecture shots...

100% crops are: 16-35 @ F4 : 14-24 @ F2.8 : 14-24 @ F4

Full frame:

Thanks,
Grig.
--
Real photography - it's just the ability to see what was already created by God!
http://www.pbase.com/grig

 Grig's gear list:Grig's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-T4 Fujifilm GFX 100S +24 more
VRII Senior Member • Posts: 2,529
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Thanks for sharing, the 14-24mm @ F/4 just looks awesome! At F/2.8 it looks a tad softer than the 16-35mm at F/4 , it would be interesting to see both at F/5.6

OSAM Regular Member • Posts: 489
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Centre looks very comparable at f/2.8 and f/4, and edges at f/4 are comparable as well. Corner on the 14-24 is considerably better, though.

jvora
jvora Regular Member • Posts: 240
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Hello Girg :

Thanks for the test - Good going !!

Like the member above me requested, would like to see these two lenses compared at f/5.6. f/8.0 and f/11.0, if possible.

I am seriously considering the 16-35, but will mainly use it between the above mentioned apertures and thus the request.

Hope its not too much of trouble - I know it really will help me a lot as I decide !

Many thanks.

Jai

VRII Senior Member • Posts: 2,529
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Yes, the center of 14-24mm at F/2.8 looks identical to the 16-35mm @ F F/4 although the corners are a bit softer, but if one is shooting F/2.8 this wide, they mainly care about the center, and in this case the 14-24mm performs great

em_dee_aitch Veteran Member • Posts: 3,675
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Thanks for posting these.

I'm also interested in seeing the 5.6 through 11 comparison to see if the 16-35 ever catches up at the edges and corners. I see a pretty clear difference at f/4 everywhere but in the center.

However, what I would really like to see is comparison to the 17-35. Since I currently use the 17-35 as backup to my 14-24 or when filters are needed, I'm one of the many who needs to decide if this new lens is a replacement for the 17-35.

-- hide signature --

David Hill
http://www.sfbayweddingphotographer.com
San Francisco, CA | Austin, TX
Certified Wedding Photography Junkyâ„¢

myseventhlife Regular Member • Posts: 328
Vs 17-35

em_dee_aitch wrote:

Thanks for posting these.

I'm also interested in seeing the 5.6 through 11 comparison to see if the 16-35 ever catches up at the edges and corners. I see a pretty clear difference at f/4 everywhere but in the center.

However, what I would really like to see is comparison to the 17-35. Since I currently use the 17-35 as backup to my 14-24 or when filters are needed, I'm one of the many who needs to decide if this new lens is a replacement for the 17-35.

From what I can see the 16-35 and 14-24 are so close in terms of corner performance which makes me believe the new lens is a great improvement over the 17-35. Unless you really need the extra stop I'd say the 16-35 is a worthy replacement of the 17-35 (of course we'd better wait for some hard evidence to confirm this assumption).

Cheers

 myseventhlife's gear list:myseventhlife's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED +1 more
knopfler
knopfler Contributing Member • Posts: 543
Re: Vs 17-35

I wonder where the focus point is...

If it's at the center, with D700's pixel size would DoF come into play at F2.8 for the kitchen items in the corners?

-- hide signature --

=========================
Jerry 'Knopfler' Yang, HsinChu, TAIWAN
http://knopfler.zenfolio.com/
http://www.knopfler.idv.ms/

myseventhlife Regular Member • Posts: 328
Re: Vs 17-35

knopfler wrote:

I wonder where the focus point is...

If it's at the center, with D700's pixel size would DoF come into play at F2.8 for the kitchen items in the corners?

Assuming the focus point is the same in both the 2.8 and 4.0 shots then the corner sharpness improvement can only be attributed to the f change and not DoF.

 myseventhlife's gear list:myseventhlife's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED +1 more
jahern Contributing Member • Posts: 953
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Thanks for posting, very interesting stuff. I'm somebody who is thinking of selling the 14-24mm for the 16-35mm as I miss not being able to use my Lee filter kit on the 14-24mm for landscapes.

It will be interesting to see the f/8 or f/16 comparisons to see if the new 16-35mm can match the 14-24mm when it comes to overally sharpness, color, contrast for landscape shots.

You also mentioned you would be using the 14-24mm for interiors and architecture shots, is this for the extra 2mm on the wide end, or is there something else like distortion that is coming into play?

John

knopfler
knopfler Contributing Member • Posts: 543
Re: Vs 17-35

My point is, if DoF comes into play, then some of the comparisons made in previous replies regarding 16-35@F4.0 and 14-24@F2.8 would be meaningless.

myseventhlife wrote:

knopfler wrote:

I wonder where the focus point is...

If it's at the center, with D700's pixel size would DoF come into play at F2.8 for the kitchen items in the corners?

Assuming the focus point is the same in both the 2.8 and 4.0 shots then the corner sharpness improvement can only be attributed to the f change and not DoF.

-- hide signature --

=========================
Jerry 'Knopfler' Yang, HsinChu, TAIWAN
http://knopfler.zenfolio.com/
http://www.knopfler.idv.ms/

Stubb
Stubb Contributing Member • Posts: 521
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

I'll join the crowd in thanking you for posting these and asking how the 16–35 looks when stopped down.

—Andreas

-- hide signature --
 Stubb's gear list:Stubb's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH DxO Optics Pro Elite
Zorpie Senior Member • Posts: 2,872
Thanks Grig

Hi Grig,

As someone who has just sold my 14-24mm and bought a 16-35mm (which just arrived today) then I am impressed with the corner performance of the 16-35mm wide open at F4 in comparison with the 14-24mm wide open. My 14-24mm (for me) was more of a 'specialist' lens and didn't get used as much as I thought it would. However the 16-35mm is my new 'walk around' lens and after seeing your images I just know I won't have any grumbles with this new lens.

The 14-24mm is a superb performer - but for me it was the inability to protect that bulbous front element with a filter that was one of the main reasons for chosing the 16-35mm instead. Plus - like I say - it was (for me) a lens that remained in the camera bag more times than it ever spent on the camera.

Thanks for posting.

Regards,

Zorpie
--
http://www.pbase.com/zorpie

If it seems too good to be true - then it isn't. If you cannot believe your eyes - then don't.

Benjamin Golub New Member • Posts: 15
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Thank you for posting this. The corners at f/4 look great...the MTF charts had everyone scared but it looks sharp to me!

Mine arrives tomorrow

Jarkko Haarla Jr Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

What is focal length used?

The images shows quite well that the 14-24 is one stop better all the way.

larrywilson
larrywilson Veteran Member • Posts: 7,160
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Thanks Grig,

It looks as if the new 16-35 is a very good lenses dispite its size. It does compare well with the 14-24, just very slightly poorer in the corners at f4.0. I don't think in real life that you would notice any difference. Yes it would be good to show the lenses at a smaller f stop, but I would think they would be very close.

Grig, this comparision is the best I have seen concerning the 16-35 vs. 14-24. My new lense is in the mail and sounds like it is going to be a winner for the price and is well made and weather resistant. Nikon is right to call it a professional lens.

Larry

 larrywilson's gear list:larrywilson's gear list
Nikon D7200 Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm F1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 500mm F4E FL ED VR +6 more
Grig
OP Grig Senior Member • Posts: 2,313
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

Jarkko Haarla JR wrote:

What is focal length used?

16mm on both...

-- hide signature --

Real photography - it's just the ability to see what was already created by God!
http://www.pbase.com/grig

 Grig's gear list:Grig's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-T4 Fujifilm GFX 100S +24 more
tbower
tbower Veteran Member • Posts: 3,515
I agree (NT)
-- hide signature --

Tom, Ohio USA
(Equipment in profile)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zuikosan/
http://tbower.zenfolio.com/

'One should not LIVE in the past, but one should never FORGET the past'.

'Did you ever get the feeling that the world was a tuxedo and you were a pair of brown shoes?'
---George Gobel, 1969

 tbower's gear list:tbower's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR
(unknown member) Senior Member • Posts: 2,305
Thanks much for these examples

I don't own either yet, but a 16-35 is on the way. There isn't a bad crop in the bunch, so I suspect the full photos can be made equal with just a touch of sharpness added to the f4 of the new lens and the f2.8 from the 14-24. All three in every crop look awfully good. Have you done any minimum focus distance with the 16-35? That would have to be tough wide open. But I have seen a couple of processed images at those extremes, and they looked good to me.

keithdbrown Forum Member • Posts: 89
Re: 16-35 vs 14-24 home test.

The 16-35 looks incredible at f4 in the center, but you are right about the extreme corners. Still a rather impressive performance.

Jarkko Haarla JR wrote:

What is focal length used?

The images shows quite well that the 14-24 is one stop better all the way.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads