UWA for D810

[Ludwig Nobel]

Hi,

I'm looking for a UWA on the D810, in the range of 16 to 20mm, mainly for landscape photography.
The candidates I've come up with are:

Nikon 14-24 2.8
Zeiss 15mm 2.8 Distagon
Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 VC (to be released in the near future)

As you can see from this list, I'm after a high quality lens, price and weight/size is secondary.
The Tamron is not yet shipping, but I've found a short review on Youtube by Matt Granger where this lens gets high praises.
My main concern with the Nikon is flare. Both the Nikon and Tamron can't take filters without special solutions, this is not the most important factor for me (polarizing at wide angles can be problematic anyway).
The Zeiss can take filters, is less prone to flare, but a prime lens. I'd be fine with manual focussing this lens.

How much is flare on the Nikon really a problem? Any insights from users (and possible solutions to this problem) are welcome.

Ludwig

[LKaven]

The Nikon 14-24 is sharp across the frame even wide open.  It does this by having an outsized image circle of over 60-70mm or more depending on focal length.  You are always shooting with a central part of the image circle where the quality is high.

I found the nanocrystal coating to be very resistant to most types of flare and to provide excellent midtone contrast.  It doesn't flare in a way that creates a cast across the entire frame, the way older designs do.  If you point it right at a light source, it has a tendency to show a string of reflections of the light source.  But shooting it on a very bright day is not a problem.

Worth mentioning that Sigma today just introduced an ART 21mm/1.4 that is likely also based on an outsized image circle.  We don't have tests yet, but the ART series has proven its mettle in the 35/1.4 and 50/1.4. 

[shadowblade]

Flare is no more a problem on the 14-24 than on any other lens that wide. Some degree of flare is inevitable in such a wide design.

Whether you shoot Nikon, Canon or Sony, if you shoot landscapes, the 14-24 is a must-have lens. At least until the Canon 11-24 comes out, anyway...

[Conner999]

My opinion will digress. Owned the 14-24 on D800e and was never that impressed. I was using for a large interior shoot project, vs. landscapes and had issues with veiling flare from strobes ( not totally unexpected given design of front element) and more importantly, the focus shift some complain of with this lens.  The latter was such a PITA that I sold the lens as soon as the project ended.

If I were to acquire an UWA again, I'd go with the Zeiss 15 or if room allowed, the 21. The former can be order/modified by zeiss to have the hood petals removed so it can take screw-on filters. The zeiss units are also stunning wide open.

Due to the nano coating,  normal point light source flare was never really an issue with the 14-24 in the rare circumstances I ever saw it. If you fine tune the 14-24 for the normal aperture you use, or enter specific af tune values for a given aperture prior to shooting, you can work around focus shift - I wanted more flexibility than those solution offered.

[kers]

i agree that the 14-24mm is a very fine lens, but the 15mm will be better in flare resistance.
This has already been discussed on the forum... I have the 14-24mm and flare pops up now and then in extreme situations ( night photography for one)

[NancyP]

Just outside of your range: Zeiss 21mm f/2.8. This is a really nice landscape lens, and it is great at f/2.8, my go-to landscape and astrophotography lens. I understand that the Zeiss 15 is even better, but haven't had a chance to see one, let alone shoot with it.

Sigma Art 24mm f/1.4 just announced, not 21 mm. The Sigma 21mm equivalent new lens is attached to the DP0 Quattro APS-C Foveon sensor camera.

[LKaven]

Just outside of your range: Zeiss 21mm f/2.8. This is a really nice landscape lens, and it is great at f/2.8, my go-to landscape and astrophotography lens. I understand that the Zeiss 15 is even better, but haven't had a chance to see one, let alone shoot with it.

Sigma Art 24mm f/1.4 just announced, not 21 mm. The Sigma 21mm equivalent new lens is attached to the DP0 Quattro APS-C Foveon sensor camera.

You're right Nancy!  I got the two mixed up.  Thanks for the correction.

[Herbc]

Zeiss 15 f2.8 is a marvelous lens, although finding good subjects for that wide is a special occasion for me. Mine sits in the bag a lot, while 20mm and 28mm find more use. 

[Ludwig Nobel]

Thanks to you all for your input, it's really appreciated.
I will order the Nikon 14-24, seems to be the obvious best choise for what I need.

[HarperPhotos]

Hello,

The new Nikon 20mm F1.8 G lens is getting rave reviews. Plus it can take filters and is lighter than the Nikon 14-24mm lens.

I have both and the new Nikon 20mm is very sharp even in the corners.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082607-REG/nikon_20mm_f_1_8g_fx_lens.html

Cheers

Simon

[BernardLanguillier]

I hear wonderful things about the Nikon 20mm f1.8 also. Zeiss quality at less than half the price and more than one stop brighter.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Conner999]

Keep forgetting about the new Nikon 20mm - we'll worth checking out given the reviews.

[logeeker]

Don't be worried about whether the zeiss 15mm is a prime lens or not. Basically people use 14-24 and 15-30 as a prime lens like 14mm and 15mm.

[Paul2660]

Hi,

I'm looking for a UWA on the D810, in the range of 16 to 20mm, mainly for landscape photography.
The candidates I've come up with are:

Nikon 14-24 2.8
Zeiss 15mm 2.8 Distagon
Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 VC (to be released in the near future)

As you can see from this list, I'm after a high quality lens, price and weight/size is secondary.
The Tamron is not yet shipping, but I've found a short review on Youtube by Matt Granger where this lens gets high praises.
My main concern with the Nikon is flare. Both the Nikon and Tamron can't take filters without special solutions, this is not the most important factor for me (polarizing at wide angles can be problematic anyway).
The Zeiss can take filters, is less prone to flare, but a prime lens. I'd be fine with manual focussing this lens.

How much is flare on the Nikon really a problem? Any insights from users (and possible solutions to this problem) are welcome.

Ludwig

I find flare on the 14-24 to be its only shortcoming. You just have to watch for it. It will catch you off guard sometimes but the flare is very hard to correct and or take out in post.   I use the Lee SW-150 system for filters on it and modified the Lee system to allow a Cavision CL-PL in one of the slots.   It's such a great lens I am willing to put up with the idiocyntrities of its use in the field. It's also a very heavy piece of glass.

I have the 20mm nikon 1.8 and it was not what I had hoped for. It has coma aberrations almost as severe as the 24 1.4 which takes it out of my bag for night work. And the bokeh just seems a bit worried looking to me. But for a wide it does a nice job when I don't want to carry the 14-24 all day. I also find the 20mm hard to manually focus as the focus ring does not have a nice smooth feel to it.

Paul

[LKaven]

The Tamron 15-30/2.8 is now announced, and it appears to be very nice.  According to lens rentals, it's very close to the Nikon 14-24 in several respects, though not all.  There is a comparison tool at DPR with a sample scene.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4651324149/tamron-15-30-f2-8-vs-nikon-14-24-f2-8-shootout

At Lens Rentals:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/02/just-the-lenses-tamron-15-30mm-f2-8

[Ludwig Nobel]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for your help with my decision.
I have bought the Nikon 14-24. Now I just need the time to go out and take some pictures with it...

Ludwig