Alternative to 14-24 on D700?

S

Steveo_Hants

Messages
763
Edit My Images
Yes
Is there an alternative lens to the 14-24 that is suited to the D700?
 
not in the same league, but the Sigma 12-24 is good if you manage to get a good copy. It has a bit of a reputation for de centred elements so you may have to check a few

Hugh
 
Nikon 17-35 F2.8 - better suited to me, so I sold my 14-24 for it.

Difficult to get hold of though, as they dont come up for sale very often.
 
boyfalldown said:
not in the same league, but the Sigma 12-24 is good if you manage to get a good copy. It has a bit of a reputation for de centred elements so you may have to check a few

Hugh
Click to expand...

So the sigma works ok on full frame?

barneyrubble said:
Nikon 17-35 F2.8 - better suited to me, so I sold my 14-24 for it.

Difficult to get hold of though, as they dont come up for sale very often.
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on why you didn't get on with the 14-24? Too wide? Any idea on price of 17-35?
 
My problem with it was two fold:

Dimensions (including the huge bulge at the front) were just too large for me.

Can't use filters with it. Due to the shape, there is no way that i found to attach filters to the front of it.
 
Cheers guys. I have a 10-20 so know all about ultra wide.

Just realized that both the 12-24 and 14-24 can't be used in conjunction with screw on filters, that really frustrates me!
 
the 12-24 has a gel filter holder built into the mount - not quite a screw in but better than nothing. The lack of any filter support is the Nikkor's big weakness IMHO of course

Hugh
 
I like to use my 10 stop ND filter quite a lot with my 10-20. Would I be able to use a gel with similar results. I have no experience of gels.
 
Yes, you could use a 10 stop ND gel behind the Sigma 12-24 but it could be a bit awkward! You would need to frame and focus the shot then remove the lens to fit the filter so a VERY sturdy tripod and head would be needed.

The 12-24 works very well on the D700 (and 35mm film) and is a lot cheaper than the 14-24 Nikon. The extra 2mm of width makes a difference when you're that wide too.
 
There's always the Tamron 17-35mm (f/2.8 - f/4) forconsideration. Excellent performance for the money.
 
is the sigma 12-24 an aspherical/square format lens, or does it go severaly fishy @ 12mm?
Was thinking about buying the tokina 12-24 for a cropped sensor cam, but, would really fancy a 12mm for the film cam, thats square, not a fish. So I could use it on both :p
 
barneyrubble said:
Nikon 17-35 F2.8 - better suited to me, so I sold my 14-24 for it.

Difficult to get hold of though, as they dont come up for sale very often.
Click to expand...

Same for me. I shoot mainly landscape / seascapes and sold my 14-24 for a 17-35.

The 14-24 was fantastic but just didn't suit my type of photography.

Chris :)
 
Steveo_Hants said:
..... Any idea on price of 17-35?
Click to expand...


I bought mine last month, for 850GBP (used). The price range on eBay is generally from 750-950GBP, depending on condition and what's included with it.

I've no experience with the 14-24mm myself, but it would seem to be the optimum lens for indoor super-wide angle, or anything where edge to edge sharpness is required and filters are not :|.
 
So would a 17-35 be cheaper then the 14-24 if I could find one?
 
Steveo_Hants said:
So would a 17-35 be cheaper then the 14-24 if I could find one?
Click to expand...

Over here (in Europe), I'd say "Yes", it would be a little cheaper (10-15%).

Not sure about prices on the other side of the world though :shrug:. But there will be so little in it that price shouldn't really need to play a big your in your decision ;).

Good luck (y)!
 
is the sigma 12-24 an aspherical/square format lens, or does it go severaly fishy @ 12mm?
Click to expand...

no it stays pretty linear - although there is some distortion around the frame edges as you'd expect at 12mm - not fishy though

So would a 17-35 be cheaper then the 14-24 if I could find one?
Click to expand...

Oh yes. Edit to add - actually I've just looked at CPB and I'm wrong about that. There isn't much in it atleast in the UK

Hugh
 
kalibre said:
Another vote for the Tamron 17-35 on the D700. Very pleased with mine. Got lots of examples if you'd like.
Click to expand...

Yes please post some examples. Bit of a long shot but have you had experience of an ultrawide lens on a crop body to compare?
 
No worries, give me a few mins to dig them out. In answer to your 2nd question, yeah I came from a D300 with the Sigma 10-20. The Tamron was chosen because it was very close the the resultant focal lengths of the 10-20 on cropped.
 
Steveo_Hants said:
Just realized that both the 12-24 and 14-24 can't be used in conjunction with screw on filters, that really frustrates me!
Click to expand...

That really depends whether you will be willing to go a small extra mile for that 14-24 quality. What I mean is that there are quite a few solutions of how to use filters on 14-24. Some using the lens hood. Try googling them up.

The quote from one of the solutions:
he standard Lee filter holder without an adapter ring fitted is a lovely tight fit to just squeeze onto the permanent hood of the 14-24 lens. The hood is hard plastic but with enough give/spring in it to hold the filter holder nice and tight.
Click to expand...

This is an example of that solution.

This is a slightly different approach.
 
Thank Kalibre. Do you have any conventional landscape type shots at 17mm?

Is the 17-35 tamron still available new?
 
Steveo_Hants said:
Thank Kalibre. Do you have any conventional landscape type shots at 17mm?

Is the 17-35 tamron still available new?
Click to expand...

I haven't I'm afraid, it's a newish body/lens combination for me so many of its outings have been urban. The closest I've got is a city skyline of NYC.
 
No one use the Nikon 18-35mm? That gets a great review on Ken Rockwell's site. I've thought about going for one.
I'd like the 14-24 but am put off by the price, size, weight, can't use a filter..... Pity they don't make a 14-24 F4 and a lower cost. I have been using the 12-24 full frame on my D700. You can set it in the menu so it does not crop to DX and if you don't use the 12-18mm bit, it works fine. A bit soft in the edges, but very acceptable for most cases.
 
No one use the Nikon 18-35mm? That gets a great review on Ken Rockwell's site. I've thought about going for one.
I'd like the 14-24 but am put off by the price, size, weight, can't use a filter..... Pity they don't make a 14-24 F4 and a lower cost. I have been using the 12-24 full frame on my D700. You can set it in the menu so it does not crop to DX and if you don't use the 12-18mm bit, it works fine. A bit soft in the edges, but very acceptable for most cases.
 
Spydercris said:
No one use the Nikon 18-35mm? That gets a great review on Ken Rockwell's site. I've thought about going for one.
I'd like the 14-24 but am put off by the price, size, weight, can't use a filter..... Pity they don't make a 14-24 F4 and a lower cost. I have been using the 12-24 full frame on my D700. You can set it in the menu so it does not crop to DX and if you don't use the 12-18mm bit, it works fine. A bit soft in the edges, but very acceptable for most cases.
Click to expand...

I started off with the 18-35mm on my D700, before upgrading to the 17-35mm f/2.8, which I mentioned earlier on. Why? Two reasons really;

First of all, the 18-35mm has a really annoying distortion signature, which becomes apparent when you get a lot of straight lines near the margins, at various focal lenghts. This mattered to me, as I found myself photographing a lot of buildings and straight edged structres. Here's an example of a wonky bridge, courtesy of the 18-35 (y) ...

WonkyBridge18mm.jpg


The other reason for wanting the 17-35mm was for the f/2.8 aperture - I got tired of the camera hunting for focus in the dark with the 18-35mm :|.

Of course, the 18-35 is a hell of a lot cheaper :D!
 
Thanks for that Naboo. It does look a bit weird the way the straight edge flicks up at the corners. If it was a conventional distortion you could get rid of it, but that look impossible.
I'll put a thread up about the Sigma 12-24mm to see if anyone can help.
Thanks again.
 
Spydercris said:
Thanks for that Naboo. It does look a bit weird the way the straight edge flicks up at the corners. If it was a conventional distortion you could get rid of it, but that look impossible.
I'll put a thread up about the Sigma 12-24mm to see if anyone can help.
Thanks again.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the problem. I trialled some software, which is supposed to correct this complex distortion. It did straighten out the edges, but it really stretched the image in the corners :(. If it was a cityscape, with people in the corners (not that unusual), it really stretched them into weird triangular shapes :razz:.

As I think Ken Rockwell said in his review, this lens is fine if you don't shoot straight lines at 18mm - the problem is, I do ;)!

The Sigma has had some very good reviews, but I don't think it's in the same league as either of the top Nikkor lenses :|. I suppose it depends how wide you really need to go :shrug:!? 12mm on an FX sensor is obviously going to make certain elements in some shots look very small indeed. Still, you know what you'll be doing with it, I don't.

Good luck in your search (y)!
 
Thanks for posting that pic Naboo. It's an odd distortion, the way it seems to flick up at the edges. If it was just a normal distortion it could be easy to get rid of, but that wavy look would be impossible I guess.
Am looking at the Sigma 12-24mm now as an alternative and have posted a thread about it.
Thanks again.
 
Oooops, sorry to post another reply Naboo. I didn't see my previous reply on here from yesterday as it was on page 2 and I thought there was only a page 1. Well I've not been up long.
Cheers.
 
Spydercris said:
Oooops, sorry to post another reply Naboo. I didn't see my previous reply on here from yesterday as it was on page 2 and I thought there was only a page 1. Well I've not been up long.
Cheers.
Click to expand...

You should just blame it on the forum ;). There've been all kinds of double posts, outages and generally wierdness lately :D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top