Nikon FX lens options

gman

gman

Messages
11,115
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
I need to get a wider angle lens for my D810 for going abroad, anything from 20mm to 35mm but I've no idea which ones are the lemons and which ones are the gems and which ones can handle the higher resolution of the D810. Not looking to spend megabucks as it is for going abroad, and will be looking at used. Not really looking to go above £300/400.

Happy to go with Sigma etc, so long as they take full advantage of Nikon's AF, exposure etc. I prefer primes, but not adverse to a decent quality zoom. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

A few I have my eye on:

  • Nikon AF-S 20mm f1.8G ED
  • Nikon AF-S 28mm f1.8G
  • Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8 G ED FX
  • Sigma 20mm f1.4 DG HSM
  • Sigma 24mm f1.4 DG HSM
  • Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG HSM
  • Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED (this is the older non VR one - might be difficult to get a good one)
  • Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG HSM (old version)

Sigma 40mm f1.4 DG HSM (seems difficult to get, but would love this lens)

Other than the Sigma 40mm and the Nikon 24-70mm, I don't know much about the others?
 
I suggest the AF-S 24-120 f4 G or the 16-35 f4G. I am not anti-Sigma but I did own a 180/3.5 EX DG Macro but after a firmware update the AF ceased to work (it was a D810 specific issue as the lens still worked on my D500).
 
welshwizard645 said:
I suggest the AF-S 24-120 f4 G or the 16-35 f4G. I am not anti-Sigma but I did own a 180/3.5 EX DG Macro but after a firmware update the AF ceased to work (it was a D810 specific issue as the lens still worked on my D500).
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm not too keen on the 24-120, but I never thought about the 16-35mm, that could be quite versatile. Shame it's f4 though, I'd need to think about that because the D810 is best at ISO64.

I'm now also looking at the Nikon AF-S 24mm f1.4 G ED.
 
I have a Tamron 17-35 which I have used with both the D750 and z6ii and am happy with it.
 
Silly/fun wide, you have the Sigma 12-24... Not small or light but as wide as me (without any significant rectilineal distortion, although the perspective [a matter of physics] can be quite extreme!!!)
 
Thanks. I'll look into all these ultrawide lenses, but I think they may be too wide.
 
Sigma 24-105 f/4 is very nice if you don't mind a big heavy lens. It is very sharp at 85mm and is good throughout the rest of the range.

Tamron 35 1.4 is slightly better than the Sigma, but bigger and heavier.

Nikon 24mm f/1.8 is nice to.

The Nikon 16-35 f/4 does everything very well. It isn't heavy but it is very long for a wide angle lens.
 
First off, outside of sigma art lenses, there aren't any that will keep up with the D810 sensor in Nikon's older AF mount.

The recommended 24-120 f4 has a great reputation but avoid the f3.5-4.5 (just junk). All the lenses you list would be OK.

Sigma 12-24 I've owned a couple and they are fantastic but not a high resolution lens even with 24mp sensor, especially at the edges. I used my current one just a couple of weeks ago, and after having become used to modern prime lenses it was a bit of a shock to look at the edges.
 
Last edited:
35mm F2 is a nice lens, one of my favourites. No let downs on Image quality and beautiful rendering.

I am firmly in the "resolution is not the be all and end all" camp and at 35mm it does get too long in some narrow streets.

What subjects will you photograph?
 
Cheers all.

I've been looking at a lot of photos online and anything wider than 24mm isn't really to my taste and 35mm does feel like it might be a little tight.

Those Sigma's do seem to lead the way with resolution when looking at DXO mark, but the Nikon 24mm f/1.8 is right up there and the Nikon 1.4 version seems a little disappointing? The Sigma 24mm F1.4 DG HSM is pretty tempting as well, but from what I've read it's a bit slow to focus especially in lower light, that could be an issue if photographing the dog around the house.

It's really for a general purpose lens to cover landscapes, street, around the house, dog etc.
 
I agree the 35mm f/2 is nice if you want a small, light lens that takes great pictures (I think Nikon copied the look it gives on one of their Z lenses). It isn't that sharp wide open but it is contrasty. If you get one, store it lens front down to avoid oil migration.

Tokina FX lenses probably don't focus fast enough for your dog. I really like them but they are a bit slow to get there.
 
gman said:
Cheers all.

I've been looking at a lot of photos online and anything wider than 24mm isn't really to my taste and 35mm does feel like it might be a little tight.

Those Sigma's do seem to lead the way with resolution when looking at DXO mark, but the Nikon 24mm f/1.8 is right up there and the Nikon 1.4 version seems a little disappointing? The Sigma 24mm F1.4 DG HSM is pretty tempting as well, but from what I've read it's a bit slow to focus especially in lower light, that could be an issue if photographing the dog around the house.

It's really for a general purpose lens to cover landscapes, street, around the house, dog etc.
Click to expand...


There's a Sigma 14mm too. Not common but they exist!
 
Erty said:
I agree the 35mm f/2 is nice if you want a small, light lens that takes great pictures (I think Nikon copied the look it gives on one of their Z lenses). It isn't that sharp wide open but it is contrasty. If you get one, store it lens front down to avoid oil migration.

Tokina FX lenses probably don't focus fast enough for your dog. I really like them but they are a bit slow to get there.
Click to expand...

That is something else I've been thinking about. Whilst super sharp is nice, I have found that it can sometimes be clinical, whereas some less sharp lenses can have better character. This is why I'm still pondering over the 1.4 ones.

Ah, Tokina. I had a telephoto one a long time ago, I think for my Canon 5D or Nikon D3 and absolutely loved it. It was a heavy solid bit of kit.
 
"The front element has a significant mark, but this is only visible in images shot at higher apertures."

Would you buy a lens with this description if it were heavily discounted? I'm not so fussed about the mark from a visibility point of view, if it were visible in a photo then PS is more than capable of cloning it out. But I'm wondering if it could cause difficult to sort flare?
 
gman said:
"The front element has a significant mark, but this is only visible in images shot at higher apertures."

Would you buy a lens with this description if it were heavily discounted? I'm not so fussed about the mark from a visibility point of view, if it were visible in a photo then PS is more than capable of cloning it out. But I'm wondering if it could cause difficult to sort flare?
Click to expand...
Personally probably not although I don't know what sort of discount that's on offer, I think it would just annoy me If the store has a good returns policy though you could see how you find it and whether there's any unworkable issues.
 
Not on a wide angle lens (I like f/9). Probably not on a longer lens. The mark will probably appear on the picture at the same point as the mark, so in the middle would be bad. In the corners might not matter. Not sure about flare.
 
The really great ones:

Sigma art 28, 40mm
Note the very intentional absence of 24, 35mm - these fall into stop down to f8 category
Tamron 35mm is excellent
19 pce is supposed to be good if you can find and afford that

Sigma 14mm and 14-24 art might also be ok

You really need to be on z or any of the other mirrorless mounts to access higher quality wideangle zooms
 
Last edited:
Always really liked the Nikon 20mm f1.8G lens; I bought one way back when it first released in 2014 and used it a lot with my D810; was a great travel option when I wanted to take it "just in case".

The 28mm f1.8G and 35mm f1.8Gare also good but I suspect might have been outclassed now by something else (I've been away for a while); I always loved my D750/D810 and Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art combo for most things but it is a heavy lens!
 
gman said:
"The front element has a significant mark, but this is only visible in images shot at higher apertures."

Would you buy a lens with this description if it were heavily discounted? I'm not so fussed about the mark from a visibility point of view, if it were visible in a photo then PS is more than capable of cloning it out. But I'm wondering if it could cause difficult to sort flare?
Click to expand...


From a dealer with a legal returns policy, I'd give it a punt and return it if the mark did cause problems. From a private seller, probably not.
 
Cheers all, plenty to ponder here. I'm not dismissing a 35mm 1.4/1.8 as well now. I think if I'm going to 24mm then I'll definitely go 1.4.
 
The 24 1.8 is really sharp. Nikon's sharpest wide angle of the period.
 
gman said:
I need to get a wider angle lens for my D810 for going abroad, anything from 20mm to 35mm but I've no idea which ones are the lemons and which ones are the gems and which ones can handle the higher resolution of the D810. Not looking to spend megabucks as it is for going abroad, and will be looking at used. Not really looking to go above £300/400.

Happy to go with Sigma etc, so long as they take full advantage of Nikon's AF, exposure etc. I prefer primes, but not adverse to a decent quality zoom. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

A few I have my eye on:

  • Nikon AF-S 20mm f1.8G ED
  • Nikon AF-S 28mm f1.8G
  • Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8 G ED FX
  • Sigma 20mm f1.4 DG HSM
  • Sigma 24mm f1.4 DG HSM
  • Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG HSM
  • Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED (this is the older non VR one - might be difficult to get a good one)
  • Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG HSM (old version)

Sigma 40mm f1.4 DG HSM (seems difficult to get, but would love this lens)

Other than the Sigma 40mm and the Nikon 24-70mm, I don't know much about the others?
Click to expand...
When I had my D700 and later a D810 I owned at various times:

  • Nikon AF-S 20mm f1.8G ED - good little lens, compact and sharp but was a take it or leave it focal length for me.
  • Sigma 24mm f1.4 DG HSM - not bad, useful in low light, didn’t keep it long
  • Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG HSM - cracking lens, the only F mount lens I kept to use on my Z7. Heavy though.
  • Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED - very sharp, but quite a large heavy lens, made for a big heavy setup on a D810 which may be an issue if you’re travelling with it.
  • Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG HSM (old version) - can’t remember exactly which version I had as my first FF lens but bought because I couldn’t afford anything else. Not great.
Also had the 16-35 which was excellent and the 24-120 F4 which was on my D810 maybe 90% of the time. It wasn’t as pin sharp as the 24-70 but it was more versatile and not as bulky.
 
Erty said:
The 24 1.8 is really sharp. Nikon's sharpest wide angle of the period.
Click to expand...

Good to know, as much as I'd like 1.4 I do need to take into account that the D810 doesn't have eye AF or the fastest AF system compared to the mirrorless stuff, so maybe a 1.8 would be a more sensible option.


viewfromthenorth said:
When I had my D700 and later a D810 I owned at various times:

  • Nikon AF-S 20mm f1.8G ED - good little lens, compact and sharp but was a take it or leave it focal length for me.
  • Sigma 24mm f1.4 DG HSM - not bad, useful in low light, didn’t keep it long
  • Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG HSM - cracking lens, the only F mount lens I kept to use on my Z7. Heavy though.
  • Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED - very sharp, but quite a large heavy lens, made for a big heavy setup on a D810 which may be an issue if you’re travelling with it.
  • Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG HSM (old version) - can’t remember exactly which version I had as my first FF lens but bought because I couldn’t afford anything else. Not great.
Also had the 16-35 which was excellent and the 24-120 F4 which was on my D810 maybe 90% of the time. It wasn’t as pin sharp as the 24-70 but it was more versatile and not as bulky.
Click to expand...

Thanks for all that, appreciated. The weight and size is something I'm now looking at, do I really want to be humping all that around when on holiday when camera phones are so good? I got the D810 and 70-200mm for specifically going out to photograph something, so the weight and size doesn't matter and I'm wondering when I would actually need a wide lens - will it just sit there?

Something like the Sony RX1R III would be perfect for travelling but my God the price. Maybe the II would be an option instead, so long as that hidden eye-AF is definitely available.
 
The D810 has face detection through the viewfinder in auto mode or group focus mode (in AF-S, matrix metering with face detection enabled in the exposure controls). It is okay but I wouldn't use it at f/1.4. The later Nikon cameras do it better and add in things like face detection on 3D tracking (which is really good).
 
Erty said:
The D810 has face detection through the viewfinder in auto mode or group focus mode (in AF-S, matrix metering with face detection enabled in the exposure controls). It is okay but I wouldn't use it at f/1.4. The later Nikon cameras do it better and add in things like face detection on 3D tracking (which is really good).
Click to expand...

I don't think I've ever used it as I tend to use 3D for people or single point for objects. Forgot all about it, cheers for the reminder, I'll need to have a look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top