Nikon WA options for FX

Livin The Dream

Livin The Dream

Messages
4,605
Name
Kris
Edit My Images
No
So I'm selling up my Canon gear and buying a D750. I have my primes sorted but I can't make up my mind on a wide angle lens. I so wanted the 14-24 but being realistic I do need the option of using filters for the odd landscape trip which leaves the 16-35 VR or the 17-35.

I was pretty set on the former but I would prefer 2.8 over VR all day long and the extra mm at the wide end isn't really that useful for me. Just a little apprehensive over a 24 year design against a newer option. Had a quick search on her but couldn't find anything, what's the verdict.
 
The MTF tests on photozone suggest the 17-35 older lens is sharper so interesting. One of the reasons I leant towards Nikon was that their WA lenses seem far superior to Canons. The 16-35L never seemed that exciting.
 
My 16-35 is real sharp. And when talking UWA, ever mm at the wide end does count. And don't discount the VR. For me much more useful than an extra traditional stop between f2.8 and f/4.
The 17-35 is a traditional bullet proof D lens. But optically it is older. That does not make it worse, just perhaps more expensive to make compared to the G VR lens.
If the excellent 14-24 is not for you then next best is currently 16-35.
 
If 18mm is wide enough, the 18-35G is where my money would go. Otherwise the 16-35 VR.
 
I'm very happy with my 16-35, I know people who love their 17-35's and I hear the new 18-35 is no slouch.

I may add a Samyang 24 1.4 in time for low light landscape action when I really need something wide and faster than the f/4 gives me.
 
well I am a bit crazy and I use the Sigma 17-35 2.8-4 with great success on my D800 usually at F5.6 . Its not the HSM model and cost me £42 ..its made of two lenses that had fungus producing one good one !!!
Also used the Samyang 14mm and thats great but manual focus ( just leave it at 10 ft !! )
 
I had the same issue a few weeks back, trying to decide between the 17-35, 16-35 and 14-24.After a lot of thought I bit the bullet and bought the 14-24.I bought a Progrey filter holder and some Lee filters and im very very happy wit this combo.I`m waiting on the Progrey 10 stop square filter being added to the USA site as its already getting rave reviews in testing-should be out in the next 2 weeks. The reviews I had were that the 17-35 wasn't quite as good as the 16-35.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
I had the same issue a few weeks back, trying to decide between the 17-35, 16-35 and 14-24.After a lot of thought I bit the bullet and bought the 14-24.I bought a Progrey filter holder and some Lee filters and im very very happy wit this combo.I`m waiting on the Progrey 10 stop square filter being added to the USA site as its already getting rave reviews in testing-should be out in the next 2 weeks. The reviews I had were that the 17-35 wasn't quite as good as the 16-35.
Click to expand...

I really want the 14-24, it's the best for all my needs but I already have a load of lee filters and having read the various adaptor options can't justify selling my lee stuff and buying into another kit, I just don't do enough landscape to warrant it. 16-35 is looking more the sensible option.
 
Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 is about as good as it gets for Nikon wide angle. If you want a zoom and use normal filters the 16-35 is the way to go.
 
Livin The Dream said:
I really want the 14-24, it's the best for all my needs but I already have a load of lee filters and having read the various adaptor options can't justify selling my lee stuff and buying into another kit, I just don't do enough landscape to warrant it. 16-35 is looking more the sensible option.
Click to expand...
Yip, the telling factor for me was that I wanted to do some night/star photography at f2.8.I sold my filters and Lee holder etc and bought the Progrey holder and another adaptor to allow the holder to fit my 24-70 lens, this with the Lee filters is working very well for me and works out cheaper than the Lee holder.Progrey do some good filters like NDA grads etc but they aren't much cheaper than the Lee once you factor in postage etc.
 
Laudrup said:
Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 is about as good as it gets for Nikon wide angle. If you want a zoom and use normal filters the 16-35 is the way to go.
Click to expand...

Ah ha, yes it is wonderful indeed but the sensible side of me says that the flexibility of a zoom whilst out in the field is a must. I have used primes before and it can limit you, that extra tweak can prove invaluable. I will add the 24G hopefully to my arsenal next year. If my main area of interest was landscape I would definitely have the Zeiss.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
Yip, the telling factor for me was that I wanted to do some night/star photography at f2.8.I sold my filters and Lee holder etc and bought the Progrey holder and another adaptor to allow the holder to fit my 24-70 lens, this with the Lee filters is working very well for me and works out cheaper than the Lee holder.Progrey do some good filters like NDA grads etc but they aren't much cheaper than the Lee once you factor in postage etc.
Click to expand...

Hi Mark, Maybe I skimmed through their website too quickly? I assumed that the holder was 150mm for the 14-24? If that's the case, would a 150x100 lee filter slide in lengthways so-to-speak? The only drawback to that is my bigstopper, given that it's 100x100?
 
They do various\ sizes of filter holders.The G150-X is the one for the 14-24, they I believe do the 85mm and 100mm systems. Your Lee filters are 100mm wide so to narrow but if the ND filters and not grads then the 150mm would fit in sideways.Im told their own ND grads are very very good and slightly cheaper than the Lee grads.The 14-24 holder fits in a similar way to the Lee holder but the gap between the first space in the holder is closer thus allowing a better chance of getting a 10 stop to seal against the light leak you get with Lee and others.Im very impressed so far with their holder and just waiting on their square ND filters(10 stop) coming out in the next week or two.
 
I bought a Tokina 11-16 for use with my D200 and also Pana GH-1 (with an adapt). Delighted to find I can use the 16mm end of it in FX mode on my recently acquired D3. Haven't used it in earnest yet so can't comment on quality.
 
The Nikon 16-35mm f/4 performs better than the Zeiss 18mm.
The Nikon 20mm f/1.8G out soon is something to watch.
The Zeiss 21mm T* is a great option but is it wide enough and do you want MF.
The Nikon 24mm f/1.4 might be a bit steep and the Zeiss 21 would trump this.

So all that considered, the 16-35mm f/4 is probably the best option but wait until the 20mm f/1.8G shows its' teeth, it could be a tough choice.

I use the 16-35, love it but will be watching the 20mm f/1.8G to see how it performs.
http://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Nikon_20mm_f1.8G_ED_AF-S_NIKKOR
 
18-35 G is cheap and sharp lens. It beats the mtf table for 17-35...but the 16-35 vr would probably offer more. But then the 14-24 would be amazing.

BTW I got the 18-35G I am 98% happy with it. Mostly being I wish it was 14mm wide around 0.5% of the time and wish it had VR around 1.5% of the time so I can do 1/30s shot with hand held.
 
Last edited:
I've been looking again at picking up another UWA for my D800 having sold a 16-35 earlier in the year to fund a 24-70. I'll probably just go for the 16-35 again as I feel it would give me a good option as a general travel lens as well as UWA.
I tried the 18-35G and didn't really like it, IQ was fine but the build didn't feel as good as the 16-35 which I'd had no problems using in all weathers.

The 14-24 f2.8 is very tempting particularly as a used model can be had for a little more than the 16-35 new but the need for a special filter kit rules it out for now.

I tried one of the first 20mm f1.8G lenses that Amazon UK got but it went back, really nice small lens and a good upgrade to the 20 f2.8D but I just wasn't blown away with it, I felt at that sort of focal length that a zoom was better for my uses.
 
The filter kit shouldn't be a problem as you know several are now available for the 14-24. I bought the Progrey one and it's lovely. I use the Lee filters with it though but I'm waiting on the 10 stop coming into stock. I also have an adaptor ring to fit my system on my other lenses so 1 set of filters can go on all my lenses- just as simple as any other filter system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top