new lens

Messages
6,401
Edit My Images
No
have the nikon 17-35mm f2.8
was looking at the nikon 14-24 f2.8
is it a good upgrade to this lens or just a side step ?
 
I had the 14-24, sold it and got the 16-35 instead, plus a Sigma 12-24 just because. The main issue with the 14-24 is that giant bulbous front element... flare/bloom/ghosting and difficult/expensive to use with ND/CPL.
 
do you need the extra 3mm? the other alternative would be a 14mm prime. And would be able to live with the limitations Steven has described?

I have the 16-35 which is very highly regarded and don't feel the need for anything wider.
 
Does not take screw in filters and is heavy / expensive.
Bit of a specialty lens for very wide photography.
17-35 more useful and practical in my view.
Cant comment on anything else since don't own them, I just use a 35mm prime these days
 
I personally went for the tokina 16-28 2.8 pro
Like the 14-24 though filters are not cheap due to the front element.
I ended up with the wondapana filter adapter.
 
Back
Top