Jump to content

Full frame wide angle choice...


mark_s8

Recommended Posts

<p>Ok folks, I've had my D700 now for a whopping 3 hours, and I'm REALLY digging it! I strapped on my Nikkor 25-50 f/4 first! I had been on a crop sensor for so long, I forgot what 25mm looked liked!</p>

<p>So, I really love landscapes, sunsets, beachscapes, etc...and I would like some ideas an/or recommendations for a wide-angle lens to get really creative.</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>Mark</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Disregarding the negatives you will hear about no filters, size and weight, the 14-24mm f/2.8 is really the wide angle of choice for the D700 IMHO. This lens is incredible sharp, and despite its size, is very well balanced and easy to handle on the D700. It does require some care in use as any very wide angle lens does, but produces great results. I would not want to be without mine.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Of course the nikon lens suggested before is the perfect choice, but if you're looking for a budget option check out the sigma 15-30 if you can still find it on ebay or somewhere. I got mine for 190 Euros and it's been a really good addition to the D700.</p>

<p>examples (d700 + sigma 15-30):<br>

http://highdef.mrtso.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/DSC_8337.jpg<br>

http://highdef.mrtso.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/DSC_8031.jpg</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Careful...</p>

<p>14-24 is not "perfect" for everyone. For many of us, the range between 24 and 35 is way more useful than the extreme wide angle of the 14-17 range. In short, if you don't really really know that you need that wide of a lens, you may very well not be served by it at all.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>24mm PC-E is IMO the most useful Nikon wide angle for landscape and architecture. If you think your pics are sharp, wait till you apply an appropriate amount of tilt and look again.</p>

<p>I also like the 24-70 for landscapes, but it's not that good at long distances. Very useful range though, and excellent quality at close to intermediate distances.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Disregarding the negatives you will hear about no filters, size and weight, the 14-24mm f/2.8 is really the wide angle of choice for the D700 IMHO. This lens is incredible sharp, and despite its size, is very well balanced and easy to handle on the D700.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Gary, clearly since you like the 14-24mm/f2.8 AF-S, by all means tell everybody why you like it. But why should other opinions that you apparently disagree with be disregarded?</p>

<p>14-24mm is a very limited zoom range, as it is not even a 2x zoom. Most of its range is in the super wide area that is not for everyone. A lot of us prefer the zoom range from 24 to 35mm that is not available on the 14-24. It is also very heavy to carry around and its front element is vulnerable.</p>

<p>Guess what, I have a 14-24 but I typically don't even travel with it. For my local, indoor work, it is an excellent lens. For landscape, I'd pick something else that is not such an extreme wide and can take filters.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>+1 for 17-35mm f2.8. Most useful for me - walk around the city and take landscape or cityscape. I picked up an old used one for about $900 but works flawlessly. </p>

<p>I do have 14-24, but rarely walk with it, but for indoor or museum only.... If you want pricme, 35mm f1.4 MF. 28mm f2.8 MF are both wonderful. I hear that 28mm f2.0 MF is great, too (I don't have that one, so I cannot comment).</p>

<p>But, then again, you may want to start from 24-70mm which seems very popular among FX body users, and I have one. My D700 is mostly attached to either 24-70 or 17-35, for walk around. And if you feel, after some time, 24-70 is not wide enough, then you add wider lenses.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I strongly agree with Peter and Shun re: 14-24/2.8...it is of limited use considering most of the range is dedicated to ultra- and superwide. I'm a hug fan of the 17-35/2.8. As I noted in a similar thread, I'm very content to trade 14-16 for 25-35mm as the latter range is far more useful. Filter-friendly is the icing on the 17-35 cake!</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have the 14 - 24mm. Limited use, yes. But you will be surprised how often you start using it.<br>

I use the 14-24mm for everything from cityscapes to strange close-ups. I also have the cheaper 18-35mm, which I actually rarely use. It is my travel lens under harsh circumstances.<br>

I also have the 24 - 70 and it is my general purpose lens. Yes, the 24mm is restrictive for landscapes, but I actually use it quite a lot for landscapes - in porttrait mode I shoot to stitch. Works great.</p>

<p>So either the 14-24 and accept the lack of filters and extremeness of the lens. Or the 24-70 and stitch. The 18-35mm is too limited to me.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>When I got my D700 after years of using DX format cameras, I was startled to find just how wide my 17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S is on FX. It was like the 10.5mm DX without the fisheye effect. The 17-35mm is very, very sharp. I hear the 14-24mm is as sharp or sharper, but have no first-hand experience.</p>

<p>For me, 17mm is plenty wide, but admittedly, I don't do much landscape work.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Shun - if my choice of words offended, then I'm sorry. It seems to me that if Mark has a 25-50, then the 14-24 should be considered. And, guess what? I do travel with the 14-24 and use it for indoor and landscape. As Peter said, it is not perfect for everyone. I simply wanted to suggest that Mark not rule it out because of the negatives I mentioned, and which are often discussed on this forum. No lens is perfect for everyone, and each of us has our favorites, and our strong opinions.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Compared to the supposedly optically superior (Nikkor) 14-24mm f2.8, <strong>the (Nikkor) 17-35mm f2.8 focal length is an ideal partner for your newly acquired D700</strong>. Flare and ghosting is minimal and the fact that it readily accept filters (ND grads especially); helpful in your quest for better out-of-camera landscapes, sunsets, beachscapes pics, is just the icing in the cake.<br>

Unfortunately, Nikon is slow in replacing their wide (AF + FX) primes.... if you need a lightweight alternative for hiking, etc. Not that the existing AFs, Ai-S, etc ain't up to it but nothing comes close (in most areas) to the (Nikkor) 17-35mm f2.8.<br>

Yes, I am loving my D700 + 17-35mm. I had been missing the "wide perspective" since dropping my F100 for the D70s between 2005 and 2008.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Although you ask about wide angles for landscapes don't forget to try short to moderate telephoto lenses for landscapes also. A tele-compressed shot along a coastline with each headland receding into the distant mist can be a powerful image. There are as many opportunities for long landscape shots as there are wide angle landscape compositions.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I can't thank you enough for the comments and ideas. The old-school Nikkor 25-50 f/4 that I have is a wonderful lens, and I'm going to experiment some more this week as I'll be traveling to a few different locations. I would tend to lean toward the 17-35 and the 14-24 that Eddie and Gary mention. I'll see how it goes with the 25-50 this week.</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>Mark</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Mark, I think you are better off trying out your current lenses on your D700 first. I wonder whether you'll be happy with the 24-50mm/f4. I hope you won't rush into buying a wide lens immediately.</p>

<p>To me, the 14-24mm/f2.8 is a very extreme lens for those who really enjoy super wide. If that is what you want, it is a wonderful lens, but if you are not into super wides, it could potentially be totally the wrong lens for you. The 17-35mm/f2.8 is far less extreme and there is also the 18-35mm/f3.5-4.5 option for now.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Another vore for the 24mm PC-E - if your style of photography allows for fiddling about with knobs and uttering expletives under your breath! If you are more hurried or gentle spoken the 17-35mm is a great alternative. The 14-24mm is a great performer but when I owned one I found it largely useless for landscapes.<br />If you don't mind manual focus primes the best superwide, in my opinion, is the 21mm Distagon ZF.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...