Thing is... while I can see the need for a 50mm f/1.4 and an 85mm f/1.4 (even if the photographer owns a 24-70 f/2.8 as we both do) because the DoF 'benefits' (or effects...?) when shooting wide-open are so clearly apparent... I can't see the need for a prime 24mm f/1.4 as the lens' inherently large DoF effectively cancels out the wider aperture unless you go in very close to the subject.
Also, 'faster' apertures to gain shutter-speed are less of an issue as camera-shake is less of an issue with UWAs...
Perhaps this is why relatively few of us are willing to drop a 'K' on a lens that will have relatively little use...(bearing in mind my 'still-useful' 50 and 85 both spend 90% of their time stuck in the bag...)
Sigma do a 24mm F1.8, which costs £1500 less than the Nikon, and I'm happy with my copy. I'm sure the Nikon one will be outstanding, but the price is a joke - it's more than my D700 cost last year.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.