Posted: 7/26/2017 3:40:47 PM EDT
I find myself wanting a nice wide angle.
Primary use is architecture and landscape. My widest zoom is the 24-70 2.8, which I love, but getting into a room is tough, I want to go down to 14. My widest prime is the 50 1.4, not nearly wide enough either. My current debate is between the 14 2.8 prime, and the 14-24 2.8 zoom. side-by-side comparison Both lenses are within a few dollars of each other. Both are, by virtually unanimous review, awesome in every respect. Neither has stabilization. The prime is a bit lighter (but a tripod is almost always going to be used) So what are the deciding factors? |
|
Would buy the 14-24 2.8 zoom in a second if I had the cash. I really need the close quarters ability. This week I was inside a series of flight simulators with a 27- 70 (nothing wrong with that) but it was so confined I had the back of the camera against the wall and the shots were still to tight.
Have the same issues inside aircraft too. |
|
FX sensor? Hands down the 14-24 2.8 if you have the cash. It's the Holy Ghost of the Trinity.
For DX (and won't do you much good on your 810) the Tokina 11-16 is probably the best mix of value and quality. KEH has some used ones in stock |
|
Seems to be unanimous.
I have the other 2/3 of the group too, so zoom it is. I know new optical glass strength is better than ever, but it's going to be weird to not have at least a UV on there. @NorthPolar any rumors of a new generation coming soon? You always seem to be on top of the soon-to-be released stuff. |
|
Quoted:
Seems to be unanimous. I have the other 2/3 of the group too, so zoom it is. I know new optical glass strength is better than ever, but it's going to be weird to not have at least a UV on there. @NorthPolar any rumors of a new generation coming soon? You always seem to be on top of the soon-to-be released stuff. While I'd be annoyed if a new version came out, I haven't heard a thing about it, and the optical quality is still insane for what you get. I was on the deck playing with mine earlier today actually. Mostly just taking photos of clouds, but still. 
|
|
Quoted:
Seems to be unanimous. I have the other 2/3 of the group too, so zoom it is. I know new optical glass strength is better than ever, but it's going to be weird to not have at least a UV on there. @NorthPolar any rumors of a new generation coming soon? You always seem to be on top of the soon-to-be released stuff. You're spending all this money on cameras and lenses, then intentionally degrading the image...for what purpose? They do little to protect the lens, as the lens can take far harder hits than the UV filter can. Also, it's perfectly possible to damage the internal components of the lens while the front element remains undamaged. Further, minor scuffs and scratches on the front element (I've seen tests where the lens was gouged on with sticks, keys, etc and still worked fine) don't have an effect on picture quality anyway. Best case scenario with the most expensive UV filter, all you gain is a false sense of security and minimal image degradation. Nothing you add to the light path will improve quality. The best you can hope for is no change. Usually, you lose something. At worst, with a low grade filter, you're still getting the same false sense of security, but really doing harm to the image quality you bought that D810 and the fancy glass to achieve. |
|
Quoted:
Snip I have this crazy mental block about it, in spite of knowing that. I get a new lens, Make sure it's absolutely perfect, and cover it with a good UV. Cleaning the lens element itself is the equivalent of nails on a chalkboard to me, yet I have no issue with cleaning filter glass. It's wacky, I know it, yet I still get bent. This lens will maybe break me of the silliness. |
|
Quoted:
Psychology is a strange bastard. I have this crazy mental block about it, in spite of knowing that. I get a new lens, Make sure it's absolutely perfect, and cover it with a good UV. Cleaning the lens element itself is the equivalent of nails on a chalkboard to me, yet I have no issue with cleaning filter glass. It's wacky, I know it, yet I still get bent. This lens will maybe break me of the silliness. Quoted:
Quoted:
Snip I have this crazy mental block about it, in spite of knowing that. I get a new lens, Make sure it's absolutely perfect, and cover it with a good UV. Cleaning the lens element itself is the equivalent of nails on a chalkboard to me, yet I have no issue with cleaning filter glass. It's wacky, I know it, yet I still get bent. This lens will maybe break me of the silliness. |
|
Btw, if it helps, I took this with my D7200 earlier today. Pointed straight up with the sun barely out of view. Only has a tiny bit of flaring, which is kind of awesome.
The sidewinder one I took two years ago with a rental. That's the 24mm side (on a DX body mind you) and is still awesome. 
|