Getting both, which now? 14-24mm or 200-500

[UTRockhound]

I will buy both these lenses. My question is which now. See my kit but I have 2.8 zooms in 24-70 and 70-200 and a bunch of D primes. I'm an enthusiast with much to learn. Darkroom experience from 7th to 12th grade, some in college. First DSLR in 2003 with D100 with SBX-80 speedlight. Been around photography for all my as my father is a major enthusiast since the 1940's Speed Graphic 4X5 to many Nikon SLR to D1X on release. I find myself relearning much of the basics after using the D100 w/ 24-85 f2.8-4 on auto for a decade while raising kids and no time to calibrate.

In the last few years I have assembled quite a few lenses around a D750 w/MB-D16 grip and have added a D7200 w/MB-D17 grip. When I got my Nikon 20mm f/2.8D I was in love with wide. My old setup only went down to ~ 36mm equivalent on DX with the 24-85 zoom. I love the 35mm f/2.0D too but when I got the 24-70 f/2.8 I find it is on my camera most of the time. I don't give a rats ass about weight when hiking so have no problem hauling big lenses if I want them.

I thought for sure my next lens would be the 200-500mm f/5.6 until I got the D7200 body. Now I have been carrying the D750 with 24-70 and D7200 with 70-200 for football and I swap the lenses to the other body for basketball. With the extra pseudo reach with the crop sensor I might be able to live without, what will be my slowest lens of all, the 200-500, for a while longer. I will love using this lens on both bodies for wildlife, auto racing and detail. But I rationalize the 14-24 focal length (still open to Tamron Sigma alt as my first non Nikkor lens) as what to get next. 200-500 is dirt cheap and likely to hold its position for quite a while in this performance price point. The 14-24 for Nikon is likely to see an E update soon. This is a good reason to wait as the price of the existing 14-24 will drop some. I managed to get my 24-70 f/2.8 on eBay for $982. No zoom drag and an obviously used but fantastic lens. I got it after the update was announced and really lucked out on the purchase. In the same vein I could wait a few months to see if there will be an update to the 14-24 and possible price drop on used copies. What I view as acceptable copies of this lens have been selling for ~ $1025 to $1150 on eBay. With the Black Friday sale I see $200 off new with refurb another $100 off that. So $1700 or $1600 refurb. I keep thinking of hiking outdoors, and visiting historical cities, just did Boston, with the 14-24 f/2.8 on the D750. I love getting close with people and things and bringing it all in in land/cityscape.

My mind tells me to get the 200-500 f/5.6. It's not moving sideways in it's price/performance point. The wide zoom is a moving target. Sorry for the long winded explanation of my dilemma but one of these is my Christmas present and the other will wait until I feel like I can't wait any longer.

Thoughts?

 

[MikeyG]

I feel your pain and, while I cannot really tell you what to do, I can tell you that I recently purchased the 14-24 2.8 and love it. I absolutely adore my 24-70 and is the most used lens to date. However, lately I have been itching for something that can push the boundaries and go wider. I was on the fence for a while with respect to the 14-24 and considered for a second the 15-30, but ultimately went with the widest option -- also, the 15 on the Tamron is more like 16mm from what I have read.

I say, go for the 14-24 and test it out. Good luck.

 

[BirdieMaker]

The 14-24 for Nikon is likely to see an E update soon. This is a good reason to wait as the price of the existing 14-24 will drop some.

There aren't any substantial rumors floating around about this - no field testers like reported on Nikon Rumors. There's just people posting on here thinking that it's ready for an update.

Are you willing to wait indefinitely for something that may or may not happen, meanwhile not getting to use a 14-24/2.8 because of it?

 

[phaedin]

I will ask a few questions.

What are you going to use the 200-500 for? What do you want to photograph with it? How often will you be using it? Is there something specific coming up that you need it for?

Now same questions for the 12-24

If you need to prioritize, then you need to analyze what you need more now and what can wait, rather than worrying about the price (unless you know for sure something is coming down the pipe)

Just my 2 cents, but hopefully it helps

 

[UTRockhound]

The 14-24 for Nikon is likely to see an E update soon. This is a good reason to wait as the price of the existing 14-24 will drop some.

There aren't any substantial rumors floating around about this - no field testers like reported on Nikon Rumors. There's just people posting on here thinking that it's ready for an update.

Are you willing to wait indefinitely for something that may or may not happen, meanwhile not getting to use a 14-24/2.8 because of it?

Your right and that's why I'm shopping the 14-24/2.8. I can get the other lens any day of the week at a great price. I'm looking for faults in my thinking and there are lots of very experienced folks on these forums who don't mind pointing out faulted thinking. Sometimes nicely but often with a razor, salt and lemon juice. I can handle it either way.

 

[UTRockhound]

I will ask a few questions.

What are you going to use the 200-500 for? What do you want to photograph with it? How often will you be using it? Is there something specific coming up that you need it for?

Now same questions for the 12-24

If you need to prioritize, then you need to analyze what you need more now and what can wait, rather than worrying about the price (unless you know for sure something is coming down the pipe)

Just my 2 cents, but hopefully it helps

I really could have used the 200-500 at the Formula one race just over a month ago and the 14-24 the week after that in Estes Park Colorado for the highland games and in Boston 3 weeks ago.

I need both. I think I will use the wide zoom more often but know I want the tele zoom too. I think 14-24 is what I should get but they are pricey even used. Can't wait to put it on my D750.

 

[BirdieMaker]

I'm not going to comment on the 200-500. I will comment on waiting for a lens to be released.

I had just bought a 70-200/2.8 VRII in July when Nikon Rumors reported on multiple sources stating a new version was coming out by the end of the year. Not wanting to spend $2100 for the lens and then sell it for ~$1400 or so when the new one came out was my greedy mistake. I had to rent a 70-200 on numerous occasions and between the rental fees and time spent tuning the AF each time, it wasn't worth it. I spent well over $1000 in rentals while waiting. It also prompted me to buy a 200/2 sooner than I would've liked to, to try to use sometimes in place of renting a 70-200. The 200/2 is great, but I digress

This was for a lens that had a fairly good amount of reports of an imminent update. As far as I know, I've never seen anything about a 14-24/2.8 update except for people on here thinking/wishing there was an update down the pike (they would probably moan and complain of a new higher price like the are now with the 70-200/2.8E FL!).

I bought my 14-24/2.8 new. But for this particular lens, I'd recommend checking out a used copy on a site like FM's Buy and Sell or KEH. The former often has excellent copies for $1200, but you don't have the option of returning. To me this was important because I use all of my lenses wide open and being sharp at 2.8 is paramount for me. I'd be willing to bet most people never use this any faster than 5.6, but I like getting very close up to subjects and in low lighting.

The thing is, with this lens, I think a lot of people are not knowledgable of how to use a UWA. The increased foreground, dealing with distortion perspective, etc... make it a lens to learn. It's not like a 24-70 you pop on and off you go. For that reason, I think people tend to give up and sell this lens in good condition.

I love this lens as it's unique and really offers something different in my bag. When I bought it, I only had a D500 and struggled with a couple of copies of the Tokina 11-20. Focus problems, and a huge color and contrast difference when used back to back with my 24-70/2.8 VR. By the way, I've since bought a D750 (and sold it) and now primarily use my D5. I was concerned the corners might not be great but that was wasted energy. My copy is good

 

[Gearsau]

Get the Nikon 14~24 f2.8. I have owned mine since 2010. ;-)

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/simulator/#FX




Angkor Wat. Nikon 14~ 24 f2.8




Valentino Nikon D3 and Nikon 500mm f4 AF-I ( not the zoom lens )

Regards Peter.

 

[dwight3]

Of course it depends on what you shoot most.

I got the 14-24 many years ago. I used it a few times, but my shooting doesn't really emphasize ultrawide. Since the lens is bulky and doesn't fit well in my bag, it doesn't really get a lot of use. It's a specialty lens.

I got the 200-500 about a year ago. It has had extensive use, even though it's bulky and doesn't fit well in my bag. I use it on wildlife, and on events (both indoor and outdoor).

They are both great lenses IMHO. I'm glad I have the 14-24 even though it doesn't get much use. And the performance of the 200-500 is really satisfying, particularly due to the performance of the VR, which is really outstanding. I have shots at 500mm handheld at 1/15 second that show no motion blur, and at my age my hands are starting to shake a bit.

 

[Ask Mait]

OP has nicely opened up his heart (and mind), I liked the original post....maybe because it is kind of my story too,. I find myself in the same boat as OP and thinking of getting 2-5 coming boxing weekend and UW some other time later. Wise suggestions and personal experiences are flowing in. Surprisingly no razors, lemon juice and salt so far!!...I am enjoying reading all those.

Thank you all.

 

[UTRockhound]

OP has nicely opened up his heart (and mind), I liked the original post....maybe because it is kind of my story too,. I find myself in the same boat as OP and thinking of getting 2-5 coming boxing weekend and UW some other time later. Wise suggestions and personal experiences are flowing in. Surprisingly no razors, lemon juice and salt so far!!...I am enjoying reading all those.

Thank you all.

Thanks Mait!

I have been watching eBay and landed a Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 in brand new condition. The seller said he used it once and I believe it. Normally you see the marks where the lens cover has been pulled off and put back on many times. This one looks brand new, I noticed my fingerprints when looking for any ding or scrape. Seller did not put the serial number in the ad. Said he got it from Amazon so I emailed to inquire and he replied with the serial number, and it begins with US. Got it for $963 and when I offered to send extra to upgrade shipping he overnight-ed it to me for free. These have been going in the $1125 to $1275 USD range and the only cheaper that I saw had a broken lens hood and sold for $910. However it had the box and original soft sling case and mine is just the lens with caps. I can live with that.

I have been reading about how to compose with UWA lenses and will travel with my tripod and remote shutter. I have a whole new world to learn. Once I get into it a bit I'm sure to be overtaken with GAS and get the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 on the way.

Merry Christmas to me.

 

[Ask Mait]

Congrats!!. and thanks for letting me know.

You have a Mary Christmas and prosperous new Year too.

 

[Bobby2Shots]

OP has nicely opened up his heart (and mind), I liked the original post....maybe because it is kind of my story too,. I find myself in the same boat as OP and thinking of getting 2-5 coming boxing weekend and UW some other time later. Wise suggestions and personal experiences are flowing in. Surprisingly no razors, lemon juice and salt so far!!...I am enjoying reading all those.

Thank you all.

Thanks Mait!

I have been watching eBay and landed a Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 in brand new condition. The seller said he used it once and I believe it. Normally you see the marks where the lens cover has been pulled off and put back on many times. This one looks brand new, I noticed my fingerprints when looking for any ding or scrape. Seller did not put the serial number in the ad. Said he got it from Amazon so I emailed to inquire and he replied with the serial number, and it begins with US. Got it for $963 and when I offered to send extra to upgrade shipping he overnight-ed it to me for free. These have been going in the $1125 to $1275 USD range and the only cheaper that I saw had a broken lens hood and sold for $910. However it had the box and original soft sling case and mine is just the lens with caps. I can live with that.

I have been reading about how to compose with UWA lenses and will travel with my tripod and remote shutter. I have a whole new world to learn. Once I get into it a bit I'm sure to be overtaken with GAS and get the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 on the way.

Merry Christmas to me.

Congratulations UTRockhound, seems like you got a terrific deal on a great lens. I just ordered one yesterday, but it won't be here for a while (7-14 business days).

I thought you might like to see what are the possibilities with the 14-24 f2.8. Here's a link to LanceB's gallery,,,,, some superb shots there.

AF-S 14-24 f/2.8G ED by Lance B

www.pbase.com

Enjoy the new lens.

 

[Rexgig0]

I mostly use my 14-24/2.8G for getting VERY close to things, if I want interesting images. Much care is needed to hold the camera level, to avoid perspective distortion, or, conversely, I can (attempt to) use the distortion artistically. Put "wide-angle lens tutorial" in a search engine; there are several good reads available, with images.

An example of this close-range usefullness, while walking about, is that I can step to the front of a crowd, at a too-popular destination, and get a shot of a sculpture, building, painting, or such, and get much more in the frame that I could with a merely wide-angle lens, from the same spot.

Of course, the 14-24/2.8G can be used for distant subjects, but one must take care not to make "molehills out of mountains," a term that I am borrowing from a fellow DPR member, PHXAZCRAIG, if remember correctly. I made uninteresting molehills out of some distant mountains during a trip that included the Blue Ridge area, but got some very memorable images on that same trip among the monuments on the National Mall in DC. This was soon after buying my 14-24/2.8G in 2015. I had already had experience with a Canon EF-S 10-22mm lens, which is "equivalent" to 16-35mm, but 14mm really is so very much wider than the 16mm angle-of-view.

The 14-24/2.8G can be used in the mountains, of course, by having something nearby in the frame, while including distant features.

To be clear, I am not any kind of expert. I progressed quickly due to having three excellent instructor/mentors, and having to be very serious in order to get good images for official purposes at work, where photography is secondary to being a first-responder.

As for the 200-500mm, we handled one at Houston Camera Exchange, and left a deposit for one, but then my wife re-considered, and we opted for a pre-owned, good-as-new Nikkor 80-400G, which is lighter, probably has faster AF, and a more-useful zoom range for my wife to use while walking-about. (She is one of the above-mentioned mentors.) I then opted to buy a Canon EF 100-40-L II IS, with a plan to add something in the 500mm/600mm range, later, so, we cannot be helpful regarding the 200-500mm.

 

[Rexgig0]

OP has nicely opened up his heart (and mind), I liked the original post....maybe because it is kind of my story too,. I find myself in the same boat as OP and thinking of getting 2-5 coming boxing weekend and UW some other time later. Wise suggestions and personal experiences are flowing in. Surprisingly no razors, lemon juice and salt so far!!...I am enjoying reading all those.

Thank you all.

Thanks Mait!

I have been watching eBay and landed a Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 in brand new condition. The seller said he used it once and I believe it. Normally you see the marks where the lens cover has been pulled off and put back on many times. This one looks brand new, I noticed my fingerprints when looking for any ding or scrape. Seller did not put the serial number in the ad. Said he got it from Amazon so I emailed to inquire and he replied with the serial number, and it begins with US. Got it for $963 and when I offered to send extra to upgrade shipping he overnight-ed it to me for free. These have been going in the $1125 to $1275 USD range and the only cheaper that I saw had a broken lens hood and sold for $910. However it had the box and original soft sling case and mine is just the lens with caps. I can live with that.

I have been reading about how to compose with UWA lenses and will travel with my tripod and remote shutter. I have a whole new world to learn. Once I get into it a bit I'm sure to be overtaken with GAS and get the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 on the way.

Merry Christmas to me.

Enjoy, and have a wonderful Christmas! My other reply in this thread contains a bit about my early experiences with my 14-24/2.8G.

 

[UTRockhound]

Rexgig0 wrote:

As for the 200-500mm, we handled one at Houston Camera Exchange, and left a deposit for one, but then my wife re-considered, and we opted for a pre-owned, good-as-new Nikkor 80-400G, which is lighter, probably has faster AF, and a more-useful zoom range for my wife to use while walking-about. (She is one of the above-mentioned mentors.)

I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.

I purchased my D100 and Nikkor 24-85 f/2.8-4 and SB-80DX speedlight at Houston Camera Exchange in 2003 when my twins were about 2 months old. I used that setup for about 10 years before upgrading. My daughter was born 17 months after her brothers so I did not have much time to keep up with advances in bodies. My father got the D1X when introduced so we have plenty of great shots during that decade from both bodies. Since getting the D750 (had the money for D810 but decided I didn't need it yet) I have got GAS and acquired many lenses. Got he 70-200mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.8 with the body for about $600 off at the time, which was Jan 1 2015. Then I picked up a bunch of D primes on eBay starting with the 20mm f/2.8D and like all of them. My only other G lens purchase has been the Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 used on eBay for $982. It was not near as nice as my new to me 14-24. First off it's serial number does not start with US. I know that is not definitive but not as comforting as having the US in front of the serial number if I ever need to sent it for service. Now that 3rd party shops can get parts again I'm not too worried. It does not have the zoom drag but the rubber grip ring is getting loose. I will order another one. It is the lens that is on my camera most of the time. I don't find any of the trinity lenses to be too big to carry. I have the MB-D16 grip and a Black Rapid Sport strap. Got the 2 body BR strap after getting a D7200 so often have both bodies with the 24-70 on one and the 70-200 on the other. I take care walking around like that and try to keep a hand on each body most of the time. With the 14-24 I will probably not be doing that. Likely to be on the FX body in my hand and perhaps the other will be hanging with a different lens in case unexpected shooting commences.

I have lots of LEO buddies in the area, many are Scout leaders like me. None are photographers though and they count on guys like you to document the damage.

Cheers

 

[MattiD80]

Hi UTrockhound.

Personally i love landscape scenes. So far I've bought very price conservatie my lenses (like sigma art 35mm wich is only 729 euro), Bought a 70-200mm F4 while on sale And with cashback for 929 euro (is now 1400 euro, wows, reminds me how good the deal was).

But for wide angle, i waited a bit, reading it's 'not easy to do right'. A lot of people sell their 14-24mm also (it's the cheapest of the trinity, second hand, cause people find it hard to use such focal length is my guess). But going in forests and mountains, i quickly realized, 35mm, even 24mm was not gonna cut it. I considered 16-35mm F4 vr, (Tamron 15-30 vc didn't exist yet), but the corners arent that sharp, and lots of distortion, and it isn't exactly cheap (1150 euro these days). Then Nikon announced price increase for EU, and my closest shop had a sale on it at same time (with old price still + promo). That was impossible to resist. As of this writing the lens is 400 euro more expensive.

As for IQ, i love the lens. Sometimes the sperical Abberation (focus shift) is annoying, but most of time, i know how to manual focus it pretty well in those circomstances. Also 14mm And F2.8 is amazing. It just does stuff you otherwise cannot do. In forests, there often things in the frame you don't want (distracting), by getting closer you remove those elements from the frame, however, then you need very wide 14-24mm answers that need totally. Even reading loads of reviews of the Tamron (for a moment i considered it, as it was in a promotion 1050 euro new), but I think the Nikon is still my best bet, as i really shoot it very often at 14-19mm, where it truly shines.

For telelens i bought Sigma 150-600mm sport, and i'm very happy with it, (got it when it was cheaper because launch of nikkor 200-500mm coming). The nikkor is also a very fine lens. I personally bought Sigma cause i like the build quality better (and i think a long lens needs it to endure decennia), Image quality seems very good, and 4x room rather then 2,5, pushpull zoom system also makes me love it. But this is not a 'Q is better then Y' post. All 150-600 and the nikon 200-500 are amazing lenses for money, that we only could dream off a few years ago. Any of them will be a joy in wildlife. Buy to your own needs.

Congratz again on 14-24mm.

 

[jeanphilippe Goube]

As 2 of 3 lenses of the holly trinitry has already been updated, the 14-24 is probably due for an update in 2017. Go for the 200-500 now

 

[PHXAZCRAIG]

That's an even better deal than my used 14-24 ($1600), but I've had mine for several years now. I really like mine, but don't use it all that much primarily because it doesn't fit in my preferred bag while the 16-35 does.

Besides a packing issue, I have problems with the lens 'cap' (where do you put it when in the field?) and a tendency to find flare when none is expected. Beware the sun just outside the frame! Which is too bad - if you have the sun in front, you risk flare. If you have the sun in back, you'll have your own shadow in frame.

Here are flare examples:

http://www.cjcphoto.net/lenstests/14-24/index.html

And here is one of the best articles on using a wide lens properly, from an unexpected source:

How to Use Ultra-Wide Lenses

When I'm out with a wide lens, I'm generally looking for a very close backgrounds, with a subject I can get close to. The point of a wide lens is to bring in some background and put the subject in context rather than isolate a subject.

 

[Gearsau]

Th

Besides a packing issue, I have problems with the lens 'cap' (where do you put it when in the field?) and a tendency to find flare when none is expected. Beware the sun just outside the frame! Which is too bad - if you have the sun in front, you risk flare. If you have the sun in back, you'll have your own shadow in frame.

Here are flare examples:

http://www.cjcphoto.net/lenstests/14-24/index.html

And here is one of the best articles on using a wide lens properly, from an unexpected source:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm

Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net

" Where do you put the lens cap? " .

Do what I do. Apart from wearing a camera vest, I always take a Lowepro Backpack . There's always space

















































Apologies for the fact these are " Old photos" . I'm going back overseas in February to Japan, China, Thailand and Cambodia for some new images

Regards Peter