Nikon lens dilemma....

[specialman]

For my wide work I currently run a Nikon 10.5mm, Nikon 12-24mm f/4 and a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. I'll admit that I'm a Nikon snob so the next purchase is the 17-55mm f/2.8 (rented one the other week and was massively impressed by the build quality and sharpness)... that's a done deal in my head.

However, I'm finding that I'm shooting the 12-24mm almost exclusively at 12mm so it's almost going to waste. Plus, I'm always wishing I had an extra stop than what the f/4 gives me. I also think there's a little bit of me that's bored and wants to buy a new lens

The 10.5mm is crazy and a novelty item but it's staying so I'm thinking, to keep an ultra-wide option open (without the mad distortion of the fisheye), get rid of the 12-24mm and look at a prime, namely the Nikon 14mm f/2.8... anyone using one in anger and if so, what do they reckon?

I'd love a 14-24mm but they're too expensive and TBH, I really dig primes these days, hence the interest in the Nikon. Am I right in thinking there are few competitors to this, aside from an old Sigma f/3.5 offering (Thom Hogan wrote some good things about it) and the Tamron 14mm f/2.8 and that they're not a patch on the Nikon version, albeit a much more expensive lens?

 

[gingerweasel]

Hi Pat, I can't help with this specific lens but I just wanted to add that I'm moving to primes too. Something about them that really pulls me to them (and the price helps too). I think they force you to think more about what it is you want to shoot and gives you some discipline.

 

[specialman]

Definitely. Don't want to sound snobbish but these days I'm going to shoots knowing what i want and how my gear can give me the shot. I love my 80-200mm dearly because of the flexibility, quality and price I paid, but a 300mm f/4 is on the horizon at some point because I know what I will use it for.

I bought my 50mm on a whim and despised it for a while as a piece of crap but have gotten very close to it of late. It's a tidy lens for £75 used. Plus, I got a 60mm macro (very versatile portrait lens) and a 85mm f/1.8, which is probably my fave lens these days.

 

[itsdavedotnet]

by all reviews ever, the tokina 11-16 2.8 would be a good buy for you.

 

[taz]

There is the Sigma 14mm f2.8. Loved this when I had my D700

 

[boyfalldown]

the only thought I had on your plan is the 14-24 second hand can be had for the 14 2.8 new price, maybe gaining a little?

Hugh

 

[technics100]

I find myself using my 50mm f/1.8 quite a bit now, out of interest, how do you find the 17-50mm Tamron? I have been thinking about one..

 

[Richard Peters]

Isn't the 14-24 supposed to outperform pretty much all the prime wide angles in terms of sharpness and distortion? Although I've not looked at any side by side reviews but I'm sure in general that's what most people seem to think?

That would be my option...

 

[specialman]

2nd hand 14-24mm is probably £950 at the lowest and although tempting, is out of my budget. I've seen used 14mm for £700, which is a lot, but easier to swallow.

Technics100, the Tammy is a very, very capable lens and for the money, it's probably the best one out there of its type. I have the non-VC version and I'm pleased with it - I just like the snob value of the Nikon one

Richard Peters, I've heard that too and if I were looking to swap one zoom for another, it's the one I'd go for. I'm quite taken with the thought of a 14mm prime though, for some crazy reason. The fact it has a slight advantage in minimum focus distance is a big thing.