Which wide angle to buy for d800

[Sgdevilzz]

i switched from the 14-24mm to 16-35 f4. Main reason is the front lens element, not because it's unprotected. I do videos and needs ND filters sometimes, the 14-24mm is a huge disadvantage. Plus it's really heavy.

 

[Luminare]

Every body thanks a lot.


I am still confused, I like both the lenses, but I have to decide on one, in my opinion 16-35 gives more versatility, ease of use and a c
Happy compromise on image quality to price as compared to 14-24.
Primes are excellent but no versatility.
After reading all the different comments from fellow CS I think both the lenses are good, i wont be in any loss choosing any one of them.

Well, the IQ of the 16-35 need not necessary be worse off as compared to the 14-24. I seriously doubt you'll notice any difference especially if you are photographing with F8 and both the vignetting and distortion can be corrected post processing.

According to reviews, the performance of both lens at F8 has no noticable differences except for the corners.

Perhaps the below review can be helpful:
Nikon 16-35mm f/4G VR Review

 

[Gnabster]

Many people talked about post processing, just hope to contribute to this thread.

Mainly people will use either photoshop or lightroom in GENERAL, of cuz there are others, but these 2 are the more "popular" one i assume? Or at least from my group of community.

Some additional info for lightroom: Using the Vignette Tool in Lightroom | Digital Photo Buzz

 

[slow trekker]

Please advice

Nikon 14-24 f2.8 or Nikon 16-35 f4

Thanks

atique, I have all three nikon lenses 14-24, 16-35 and 17-35 and I still can't tell you which is the best lens with the d800/e. I use the 14-24 when I want something ultra wide, 16-35 when I want something lighter and 17-35 for the 2.8 without the bulk of the 14-24.
For travel, outings or even trekking I always carry 2 bodies 800 and 800e, one with 28-300 the other with one of the three wide zooms and the 16.5 fisheye. Before the 800s I used a 700 & a 300s and the 16-35 was not out. So it's a personal preference. One thing for sure just get one because you will always feel that you should have carried the other lens.

 

[atique]

Thanks a lot for the advice, my own thinking after reading all the CSers is buy one of the two both are equally good

I already have a nikon 50 mm 1.4 and 105 mm 2.8.

I think it will be a appropriate combo to have a UWA for always on the camera type lens.

Thanks buddies

 

[andykyaw]

Please advice

Nikon 14-24 f2.8 or Nikon 16-35 f4

Thanks

Hi atique,

I'm not sure if u hv made ur decision but here is a review of 16-35mm which i think can help u with ur decision.
Nikon 16-35mm f/4G VR Review
(I have asked the same question to Mr LIEW TL and he passed me this link and told me that he agrees with this review).

If you don't mind about 2mm loss at the wide end + a little bit better sharpness, 16-35mm is good.
Pros => u can use Filters (which is very important for some people), VR (good to hv even for WA) and longer end 24 Vs 35mm (which can be handy for street).

Hope it helps
Andy
(PS: I do not have this lens yet, still using 24mm for landscapes from 24-120mm f4).

 

[sjackal]

It's just a hobby

Thats why you can buy all four! 14-24, 16-35, 17-35, 24 1.4 prime. Get them all.

If use for work, only one: 14-24

 

[Blur Shadow]

Thats why you can buy all four! 14-24, 16-35, 17-35, 24 1.4 prime. Get them all.

If use for work, only one: 14-24

There is also the old 14mm f/2.8 prime. Haha. But yeah...

 

[snickers]

I think there is too much distortion at 14mm.

 

[Blur Shadow]

I think there is too much distortion at 14mm.

Then you haven't seen the 16mm on FX.

But I was told (and later, discovered to my amusement), that the lens profiles in Adobe Photoshop works wonders!