Nikkor 14-24 2.8 alternatives. Landscape lens

Discussion in 'Nikon Lenses' started by zulu42, Feb 20, 2018.

  1. zulu42

    zulu42 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,089
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Location:
    NV
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I'm trying to decide which lenses to lust over.
    Obviously, the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 is a stellar lens, seems to be sort of an industry standard.

    Shall I just continue to save and wait for the best, or are there other wide lenses, even primes, that can get me close to the IQ of that lens?

    Any other recommendations for wide landscape lenses for full frame Nikon?

    Thanks!


     
  2. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,612
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Some say the Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 is every bit as good as the Nikon
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Upadhyay

    Upadhyay TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2017
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Pune
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 delivers the same quality at half the price
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. nerwin

    nerwin Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Messages:
    3,486
    Likes Received:
    1,433
    Location:
    Vermont
    Okay, so we have a couple options here for the 2.8 line.

    Tamron 15-30 2.8 is extremely well received and like @jaomul has noted, it's just as good (if not, better) than the Nikkor counterpart.

    Now if you are budget conscious like I am and can't afford such glass, then Tokina has your back. They sell a 16-28 2.8 for how much? $1800? Nope. $1200? Nope. Try under $600! Yeah it's 2mm less than the Nikkor BUT it is heck of a lot cheaper and the image quality is pretty good for the price.

    Sigma is also coming out with a 14-24 2.8 which might be another great option.

    Nikon also makes a 17-35 2.8D which some people like but that lens is really showing its age now but Nikon is still making them and you can find them still pretty expensive on the USED market. It's a good lens still but there are cheaper and better options in my opinion.

    If you don't need that extra stop and are happy with f/4 lenses then there are some cheaper but still good options available.

    Nikon has a 16-35 f/4 VR which I really liked, I owned it. Fantastic lens, but it needs to be updated and it has major distortion at 16mm and at 35mm is kind of poo wide open. I sold mine and bought the Nikon 20 1.8G and I LOVE it. One of the best primes I ever bought. No distortion, super sharp, the colors pop like crazy. Beautiful piece of glass. Likewise, Sigma also sells a 20 1.4 ART around the same price as well. That is also VERY good.

    Sigma also makes a 12-24 f/4 which I heard is pretty awesome and 12mm on full frame? You are talking near fisheye territory. It's crazy wide. You woulden't think that extra 2mm on the wide end would make such a difference.

    Tokina makes a even cheaper option, the 17-35 f/4 which is pretty good and is only $400 NEW!

    Now last but not least, Nikon sells a 18-35 3.5-4.5G which a lot of people really like, they are cheap and you can find used at a pretty good price and what a lot of people like about them is the weight and size. They are not heavy and not overlay large.

    Now if you REALLY need cheap and compact, then check out the Tokina AF-D 17mm f/3.5 Pro on eBay. It's quite a good little lens and I think a few people here at TPF has it. You can find then under $300.

    So it comes down to, what are you willing to spend and what are you going to be shooting?

    Hope this helps!!
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2018
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  5. zulu42

    zulu42 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,089
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Location:
    NV
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thanks all for the replies!

    @nerwin , thanks so much for the rundown, I really appreciate it!
    Since my recent upgrade to FF, I've been trying to map out lens upgrades. First up is wide/superwide primarily for landscape. Maybe some street/architecture and general wide lens type use. Speed is lower on the priority list, 2.8 is awesome but f/4 is probably okay. Sharp, good color rendition is priority.

    I'm willing to splurge a bit and I would probably bite the bullet on a used Nikon 14-24 or Tamron 15-30... IF they took screw-on filters. I am just worried about the expense and hassle of going down the filter road with those lenses. For that reason I looked at the 17-35, but I feel like I would always be wishing for that crazy FOV at 15mm and lower.

    Maybe I'll look into the used filter market

    that Nikon 14mm 2.8 is probably an awesome lens and accepts rear mount filters, but it's almost the same price as a 14-24...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    41,361
    Likes Received:
    15,648
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    List of recommended lenses for the Nikon D850 camera | Nikon Rumors

    I believe Thom still owns the 14-24/2.8, but is actually on a consistent basis, using the 16-35 f/4 VR lens for his landscape and outdoor work, due to the compactness of the lens, and the filter threads and the greater versatility of having "two extra lenses" in there on the top end; the difference between 24mm and 35mm is quite, quite large, and many times having a longer lens is helpful in making more of the landscape register on-film (on-sensor) as physically larger than it would register with a shorter lens length used. The 14-24 covers the wide end more, whereas the 16-35 covers the wide end pretty well, but also goes eleven ticks above 24mm...making for in the opinion of many, a more-versatile tool, for more situations. Plus...it offers VR, which opens up tripod-free shooting, slow-speed panning, and shooting in the wind, or aboard boats, or when out of breath while hiking, etc..etc..

    No screw-on filters would be a PITA, I think...I don't own any lenses that cannot take a screw-on filter...graduated neutral density, ND, and polarizing filters that just screw right onto the lens are easy to pack,easy to store, and are never found "separated from their holder" and located in "my other backpack, back in the rig!"

    I do NOT agree that post-procesing can replace in-the-field neutral density,graduated ND, and polarizing filters. To me, I want the filter threads.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  7. zulu42

    zulu42 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,089
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Location:
    NV
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Excellent points, and thanks for the reference. I can really see the benefit of going from 16 all the way to 35mm. The soft corners at 16mm is an issue, I guess. Samples don't look too bad to me.

    The convenience of screw on filters is really a huge deal. There is the argument, though, that if I get into a filter holder and square filters, maybe it can be used on other lenses. Maybe I wouldn't have to buy new filters in different diameters every time I get a new lens. That's a lotta math to figure out which is more financially sound.
     
  8. JonA_CT

    JonA_CT TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2015
    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    1,786
    Location:
    New London, CT
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    If you wanted to go the prime route, you could check out the Irix 15mm f2.4 . I haven’t really used it with my D800 yet, but I did post some photos recently with my D600.

    It takes a 95mm front filter and has a rear filter slot as well.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  9. zulu42

    zulu42 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,089
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Location:
    NV
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thanks Jon, I will check it out.
    The guy I bought my D800 from has the Tokina 17-35. He wanted to sell it to me with the camera and I could still get it. Probably under $300. But, I've spent a lot of money buying mediocre gear only to replace it. Trying to avoid that this time.
     
  10. JonA_CT

    JonA_CT TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2015
    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    1,786
    Location:
    New London, CT
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    • Useful Useful x 1
  11. zulu42

    zulu42 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2015
    Messages:
    1,089
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Location:
    NV
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Nice color, contrast. Nice look to those shots. I have to say, some look sharper than others. Much cropping? Any of those at f/22?

    Very helpful, much appreciated.
     
  12. JonA_CT

    JonA_CT TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2015
    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    1,786
    Location:
    New London, CT
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit


    All shot F8-11.

    The ones that aren’t as sharp are my fault. The reason it’s so cheap is because it’s manual focus only. Usually, that wouldn’t be a problem at that focal length, but it was more dark than not when I took the sunrise photos. I straight up couldn’t see the rocks (and the shadows were lifted a ton in post to get them visible in those shots).

    Live view and a graduated ND filter would have helped tremendously. Now I know!
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

azs