Nikon 14-24. A Good lens? Considering buying one for my D810

[stevesanacore]

I've been using the 14-24 for many years now and it's a killer lens. Because I've moved on from Nikon to Sony, I'd love to sell it and move to an alternative that works with the AF on the Sony - but I just can't find one! This lens is so sharp, solid and relatively compact considering it's range. I found it very balanced and comfortable on my D800E. Although the front element is certainly prone to flair, I have not had a lot of problems in that regard.

[Allanvet]

I had the 14-24 for my D810, but sold it for the much better (and half the price) Tamron 15-30 f/2.8. Not only is it sharper (especially on the edges) it has image stabilization. It ain't light, but worth the trade up for me for the improved image quality.

I couldn't agree more. The Tamron 15-30 is incredibly sharp and punchy (zeissy?).

[OldRoy]

...
4.  Distortion, but all 14mm retrofocus lenses have it, Not the distortion like barrel, but where objects at the edge of the frame elongate and get squat.  No fix for that I know of.  Even Rodenstock wides show this.....

I have the 14-24 and I'm very familiar with this extremely annoying problem at the wide end - volume anamorphosis. A relevant DxO article:
http://www.dxo.com/us/photography/tutorials/understanding-volume-deformation

As far as I recall (I've largely lost interest in photography) their software, which I tried a few years ago, is a fairly useful tool, having 2 different strategies for dealing with the problem depending on the subject. I believe there's a stripped-down version of the full package which is available and dedicated to the fix. It shouldn't be hard to locate on the DxO site - assuming my memory is correct.

[danielduarte01]

Returned mine about 8 days after getting it. Optically a fine lens but it's too wide for me... Screams HDR and that typical wide perspective that is so pervasive across the net.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alan_b]

I have the 14-24 and I'm very familiar with this extremely annoying problem at the wide end - volume anamorphosis. A relevant DxO article:
http://www.dxo.com/us/photography/tutorials/understanding-volume-deformation

As far as I recall (I've largely lost interest in photography) their software, which I tried a few years ago, is a fairly useful tool, having 2 different strategies for dealing with the problem depending on the subject. I believe there's a stripped-down version of the full package which is available and dedicated to the fix. It shouldn't be hard to locate on the DxO site - assuming my memory is correct.

It's called rectilinear projection, and it's "correct".  If you don't like it, the choices are A: depart from a rectilinear projection to something more spherical (barrel-distorted or fisheye lens), or B: step back.

[danielduarte01]

Optically I found it pleasing but anything wider than 20 (perhaps even 24) takes on this stereotypical wide fascination - landscape esque effect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul2660]

As most wides are retrofocus, not sure what you can use.  However the look of the 14-24 for me is very nice.   Can't see the HDR comparison, as HDR has nothing to do with wide focal focus, at least to me.

As previous mentioned I guess you will need to step back a bit or go to the fisheye style lens, of which the look is a lot more stereotypical to me than the retrofocus look from the 14-24 or any other wide. 

You might also look at the 17-35, as it's optical very good and not quite as wide, may see less of the aspects of retrofocus element, (widening and flattening of objects to the edge of the frame). Plus it takes normal filters and does not have the outer curved element which is flare prone.

Paul C