Pros and Cons of AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
- Thread starter The Hulk
- Start date
This one...
Wow... Okay... It would be great if they come up with another version that could autofocus...
Then it would not cost the same price, probably 3 times more.
I am happy with the manual focus one. Especially for this focal length.
For panoramas, you don't really need autofocus as generally most of your stuff will be at infinity.
One glaringly major con with the 14-24 is that it does not accept filters. The front element protrudes dangerously out and will get in the way. This will be a big problem if you want to use this lens for landscape shots. Other obvious cons are its heavy, oversized and expensive.
Pros are that its the sharpest FX zoom lens available. Very very minor distortion at 14mm and excellent corner and center sharpness with little flaring. Its widely hailed as legendary.
You're using a DX camera, I'd just get a DX lens even if you're planning on a FX route. You can always sell the lens off.
One glaringly major con with the 14-24 is that it does not accept filters. The front element protrudes dangerously out and will get in the way. This will be a big problem if you want to use this lens for landscape shots. Other obvious cons are its heavy, oversized and expensive.
Pros are that its the sharpest FX zoom lens available. Very very minor distortion at 14mm and excellent corner and center sharpness with little flaring. Its widely hailed as legendary.
You're using a DX camera, I'd just get a DX lens even if you're planning on a FX route. You can always sell the lens off.
Nope, i have not used ultra-wide angle lens before as most of my friends seldom use DSLR. Usually i will shoot more on portraits with my 50 1.8f and tammy 15-50 f2.8. Will research more on it before committing. Thanks.
Well, at the very least, there would be a third party lens competing with Nikon's and Canon's. I wonder why Sigma discontinued its 14mm f2.8...
Digressing from this discussion on the 14-24 and to share my dilemma after swopping to FX.
I had to dump my 11-16 (like what nickzkcin suggested). I narrowed my choices to (i prefer uwa zoom lenses):
1. Nikkor 16-35 f4
2. Nikkor 14-24 f2.8
3. Nikkor 17-35 f2.8
4. Tokina 16-28 f2.8
In the end, i decided to remain loyal to Tokina and went for the 16-28. Feature-wise, it is about the same as the Nikkor 14-24. It also features a a bulbous front element which doesnt allow front filters but i managed to DIY for it to mount square filters after learning from experts here. Physically, it is heavy, big and comes with a lousy lens cover (that falls off easily).
However, what bought me over was the price and IQ. it is about half the price of the 14-24 and performance-wise it almost comparable to the 14-24. Reviews is also good for this tokina UWA.
Just my 2 cents
I had to dump my 11-16 (like what nickzkcin suggested). I narrowed my choices to (i prefer uwa zoom lenses):
1. Nikkor 16-35 f4
2. Nikkor 14-24 f2.8
3. Nikkor 17-35 f2.8
4. Tokina 16-28 f2.8
In the end, i decided to remain loyal to Tokina and went for the 16-28. Feature-wise, it is about the same as the Nikkor 14-24. It also features a a bulbous front element which doesnt allow front filters but i managed to DIY for it to mount square filters after learning from experts here. Physically, it is heavy, big and comes with a lousy lens cover (that falls off easily).
However, what bought me over was the price and IQ. it is about half the price of the 14-24 and performance-wise it almost comparable to the 14-24. Reviews is also good for this tokina UWA.
Just my 2 cents
The Tokina 16-28/2.8 is cheaper than the Nikkor 16-35, and a stop faster.
It loses VR (which isn't such a big deal for a UWA) and the Nikkor brand name.
The main downside is the lack of a commercially available filter + holder system. Perhaps if its popularity grows, some company will make a filter holder for it.
It loses VR (which isn't such a big deal for a UWA) and the Nikkor brand name.
The main downside is the lack of a commercially available filter + holder system. Perhaps if its popularity grows, some company will make a filter holder for it.
yea, 2mm tighter unfortunately. But the 1 grand in savings fits the bill for a weekend warrior like me. haha.
Yes, the tokina 16-28 isnt exactly very popular as compared to its' DX counterpart.
It takes filters actually, just that the filters and holders are hella expensive. If you are willing to DIY, there are a couple of cheaper alternatives out there but filter collection is somewhat limited.
I heard that problem has been solved....
I will know for sure in a weeks time...
This one...
I love my Samyang (Rokinon) 14 f2.8 lens...Its super sharp and one of the best deals out there...I got mine in Nikon Mount, but I also use it with a Nik to EOS adapter on my 5D when I need a wider view...I think the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 is a great lens but its crazy price and heavy weight does n't fit my needs or budget, and it will invariable fail as its a "G" lens with a built in motor. Thats why Zeiss still builds manual focus glass to this day for Nikons and Canons...
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_fyiKcLWpx7A/TQ2U8bhFBrI/AAAAAAAABB0/grQAOUSKLhs/s1600/P1011058.JPG
Cheers
Last edited:
It's the AF-S which makes it a version with built in motor. G makes it gelded (aperture ring removed).
How does having the AF-S motor hurt? If it fails, you can still manual focus.
The front element will not protrude beyond the lens hood, even at 14mm. So if there's anything which is in the way of filters, its the lens hood. Contrary to what some folks (and I suspect some might not even have handled the lens before or possess basic knowledge of handling a lens) think, the front element is not really exposed to the amount of "danger" as they'd like to imagine.
Not sure what your asking...How does the AF_S motor Hurt???... I did not state the AF-S motor hurts, but motors do fail with heavy use, I value sharpness, longevity, and reliability over what looks cool!.........If you need AF zoom for your Wide angle needs, go for it! The reasons I choose not to buy it are my own...I also formally owned the old Nikon 14 F2.8 AF... I happen to like small, and the prime 14's are smaller than the Zooms...The Samyang in particular is also about 1/4th the price! and In my book that means a lot! I am always mindful of budget vs wants vs true needs..... As I said in my post, I cross mount glass on alternate brand FF camera's for certain jobs...Having the F stop ring is a very important feature (to me) for that reason as well.... Maybe you should ask daredevil 123 for his opinion on why he uses the Samyang... I don't need auto focus for wide angle view, maybe you do, so more power to you...
I prefer to spend my money on gear that I find useful (for me) and If I save some bucks then I can do more travel (The money I save on the Samyang can pay for a trip to Bangkok for instance)... much of my gear is either old school, or not mainstream...But I can do nearly any job that is asked of me by clients...( 600mm f4 down to 8mm FE, and over 10,000 ws of flash pwr )...So anytime I can do the same job with much less expense its a good thing!
Cheers
Last edited:
That's like saying you have to drive a Ford Model T to avoid having electronics failure in contemporary models :bsmilie::bsmilie::bsmilie:
So ziess and voigtleander and Leica are Model T's as well???? I don't think any of them are bad lenses....The Nikon 14 f2.8D has no built in motor, is it also a model T????? So I take it you only approve of folks with "G" lenses and those of us with D or MF glass need to go elsewhere? Any way I give up,
Any way, You win!!!!! I don't have time for a flame war...I originally posted in response to daredevil 123's pic of his Samyang....It seems I crossed the "Holy Grail" when I dared to say that I don't need "G" lenses..
Cheers
Last edited:
Similar threads
