Nikon 14-24 on Canon 5D

<p>Can anyone using an adaptor to use Nikon 14-24mm on Canon 5D tell me whether it will affect the camera or the lens in any way? What adaptor is the best of this purpose because it is a G-type lens?<br>

Gurbally/Toronto</p>

 

<p>Comparison tests vs Canon lenses (all tested on Canon bodies):<br /> http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon14l2_nikon1424/nikon1424_canon14l2_a.html</p>

<p>Ordering info:<br /> http://www.16-9.net/nikon_g/</p>

<p>You'll get people who say Mark at 16-9.net somehow magically doctored the tests so that the Nikon outshines the Canon. Just ask them to point you to any tests where the Canon lenses perform better than the Nikon.<br /> Good review of that adapter and lens is here:<br /> <br /> http://www.davidclapp.co.uk/nikon1424.php<br /> <em>"What about cost? I look at it like this; I would love to have a 21mm 2.8 Zeiss, but I can't afford one. I would also like a Canon 14mm L, an 18mm Olympus and a Canon 24mm 1.4L mkII but I can't afford those either. What if one lens did them all for the price of the 14mm? That's why I bought the Nikon 14-24." </em> <br /> Haven't used the 14-24 on a 5D, but have on a 5D2. Pricey, esp. with adapter, but for my money it's the sharpest solution available.<br /> <br /> --------------------<br /> <br /> Note that you could use any $25 Nikon>EOS adapter with the 14-24, but then you have to "shim" the aperture open to desired size before mounting the lens because there's no way to control the aperture with a plain adapter and the lens will stay at f22 all the time. (There's a website that explains with pictures how to shim it, but I don't have it bookmarked.) If you can live with that tradeoff to save more than $200, however, that solution works fine (esp. for those with Live View to aid focusing). I used the shim method for awhile (mostly to see whether the lens was all it was reported to be) before I got the 16-9 adapter.</p>

<p>Simply an awesome lens. Extremely sharp even wide open and very little distortion. No zoom from Canon comes close IMHO.</p>

<p>Interesting, the Nikon does look at lot better at 2.8 in the corners, maybe a little better in the center. But, it loose ground to become more equal after 2.8. I had heard good things about the Nikon lens before, I'm not a super wide fan any more but if the bug catches me again I may give the Nikon a good look. </p>

<p>With the new gnerations of DSLR though I'm hoping that all manufactures will need to step up lens performance to a new level. That would be great, but no matter what won't get here fast enough.</p>

<p>Ralph, I have read 16-9.net comparisons, and have decided to give Niko 14-24 a try on my 5d.<br>

Where can I get the 16-9 adaptor?</p>

<p>Only from 16-9.net, I think. I had to wait several months for mine, but I was an early adapter adopter, so maybe the backlog of orders has cleared now.<br>

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/784054/</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Don't expect much (if any) communication with the seller (Mark aka "Husband") after you plunk down your money. Expect a much longer delay than the amount of time stated on his web site...and don't expect his web site to be updated often either. Do expect "wise-ass" remarks/comments from Mark when he does respond to criticism - he will post these occasionally on the FM forums in the "Alternative Gear" thread.</p>

<p>I had the adapter - it worked fine...I sold it preferring a Nikon body instead. The fellow who purchased it from me complained that on his 5D II body the lens "wobbled" - meaning it was not a tight fit. That being said, I had no problems with the adapter/14-24 on my 5D II. So do be aware of slight variances in the width of the adapters (or camera bodies) that might affect stability...<br>

rdc/nyc</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks Robert. You are right...I will follow your path to have a Nikon body rather than have problems later.</p>

<p>Why would you want to ham&egg this when you have perfectly viable options from Canon or in the Canon mount from Sigma and Tamron. First I"m not so sure that review wasn't using a bad copy of the Canon 14. </p>

<p>I'm not a pixel peeper basher, but C'mon. There are many photographers producing stunning photos in this focal range without having to resort to frankenstein gear approaches involving adapters and Nikon lenses on Canon bodies. I'd suggest maybe renting some gear and doingyour own testing. Don't believe everything you read on the net. Could it be that 16-9 has an agenda to sell some inventory of Nikon lenses? Ya Think?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I will follow your path to have a Nikon body rather than have problems later.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Wise move.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Bob wrote, "I'd suggest maybe renting some gear and doingyour own testing. Don't believe everything you read on the net. Could it be that 16-9 has an agenda to sell some inventory of Nikon lenses? Ya Think?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually, no; 16-9 doesn't sell Nikon lenses. Renting a 14-24 and corresponding Canon lenses will cost the OP a few hundred dollars at a minimum, so unless he's as skeptical as Bob, he'll have to rely on others' tests.</p>

<p>As I said in my initial post, <em>"You'll get people who say Mark at 16-9.net somehow magically doctored the tests so that the Nikon outshines the Canon. <strong>Just ask them to point you to any tests where the Canon [ultrawide zoom] lenses perform better than the Nikon 14-24." </strong> </em> (Bob? Anyone? Proof?)<em><strong><br /> </strong> </em></p>

<p>If someone (like Bob) cannot see the difference between the Nikon 14-24 and Canon's best UWA zooms - or if he refuses to acknowledge that Nikon at least in this case might make a better lens than Canon does (same effect) - I'm not going to change his mind.</p>

<p>Personally I have too many Canon lenses that I like (especially fast primes) to switch to Nikon (and I like the affordability of Canon's 21mp body, pending the D700x). But if buying a Nikon body is an easy thing for you to do that's obviously the most elegant solution if you want the cleanest way to shoot the sharpest wide-angle zoom available. If you're content with soft corners etc. when shooting wide open or always shoot at f8 or have to use grad ND filters (the Nikon can't), sure, use the Canon ultrawide zooms.</p>

<p>P.S. Lens adaptors are hardly "Frankensteinian." One of the biggest appeals of the EOS platform for many photographers is that so many other companies' lenses can be adapted for use on Canon bodies.<em><br /> </em></p>

<p>I think what Bob was meaning is that 16.9.net has an interest in selling Nikon lenses not because they actually sell Nikon lenses but because they sell the adapters. I'm just guessing that's what he meant by that I don't know if it is true or not. I do know that everyone loves the Nikon 14-24 and it rivals primes but yet is a zoom.</p>

<p>I don't think that getting the adapter is going to work for most people because of the logistics of getting one in the first place. One of the previous posters noted how poorly communication is with the makers of the adapter are and I would agree because I looked into getting one before getting my 14mm f/2/8II. I personally would never deal with folks like 16.9 based on their unreliable customer service. But, to each his own.</p>

Here's a clip from their own website forums from a user. the "Jonny" in the post isn't me:

<br />

<br />

BEGIN POST: I was able to get a "response" from Mark on Feb 10. It was indirect and not related specifically to my question. The response was:<br /> Hi Jonny:<br /> <br /> We're working to clear the order backlog and are a bit swamped by demand, but all orders placed are secure in their queue position and we're working through the backlog on a first come first served basis. More than 50 units will ship this week.<br /> <br /> Apologies for the delay,<br /> Mark<br /> <br /> I have not been able to get any response to any question directly. I have no idea whether I will ever receive my adapter. I certainly hope to. I have a Nikon 14-24 lens just sitting around. END POST

<br />

Wow....sounds like a great place to order from.<br />

<p>Yes, it has always taken several months to get the adapter; I think it took me four months to get mine. I used the shim method in the interim, with a $25 adapter.<br /> <br /> Let me just say once more: <strong>This solution isn't for everyone.</strong> Using non-EOS-mount lenses is never going to be a mainstream course of action. Most Canon users will decide it's not worth the hassle.</p>

<p>But since I wanted 20-plus megapixels and the sharpest wide-angle zoom bar none, I had a choice between spending $10,000 for the D3x and the 14-24, or spending $5,000 for the 5D2 and the 14-24 and adapter, forgoing autofocus and fully auto-aperture setting in exchange for saving $5,000.</p>

<p>Also I should note that I felt "safe" trying this non-standard route [a] because my $25-adapter solution worked, because I knew I could get every penny back for the 14-24 should I change my mind (it has actually <em>appreciated</em> , thanks to Nikon price increases!), and [c ]because autofocus isn't essential (to me, at least) in a 14-24 lens.</p>

<p>If any of those things don't apply to you, by all means buy the Canon 16-35 or some other Canon lens; I don't have Nikon stock so it won't bother me any!</p>