Wide Angle Dilemma: I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being...

SteveLew Loc: Sugar Land, TX

I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being extremely sharp and I have heard very good things about the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 for full frame. Dxmark has not rated either the Nikon 20/1.8g or the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 with VC.

The Nikon 20/1.8g sells for $800, the Samyang 24/1.4 for about $500 and the Tamron for $1,200 at B and H.

What would you do?

Wendy2 Loc: California

See if you can rent them. That way you will get first hand experience with each lens and never wonder if you made the right choice.

MtnMan Loc: ID

Steven A Lewis wrote:

I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being extremely sharp and I have heard very good things about the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 for full frame. Dxmark has not rated either the Nikon 20/1.8g or the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 with VC.

The Nikon 20/1.8g sells for $800, the Samyang 24/1.4 for about $500 and the Tamron for $1,200 at B and H.

What would you do?

I d get the Nikon 16-35 again. Love mine.

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

MtnMan wrote:

I d get the Nikon 16-35 again. Love mine.

:thumbup:

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Steven A Lewis wrote:

I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being extremely sharp and I have heard very good things about the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 for full frame. Dxmark has not rated either the Nikon 20/1.8g or the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 with VC.

The Nikon 20/1.8g sells for $800, the Samyang 24/1.4 for about $500 and the Tamron for $1,200 at B and H.

What would you do?

If you can hold off I would wait and see how the Tamron reviews, the Nikon 14-24 is supposed to be the gold standard of wide angle zooms, I even read an article written by a professional photographer that has purchased that lens for his Canon body and shoots it manual.

The Tamron is being touted as a Nikon killer aimed specifically at the 14-24..... It may be worth waiting to see if the lens is truly as good as Tamron says it will be. Or you may want to consider the Nikon in that list of yours.

Leitz Loc: Solms

Steven A Lewis wrote:

I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being extremely sharp and I have heard very good things about the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 for full frame. Dxmark has not rated either the Nikon 20/1.8g or the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 with VC.

The Nikon 20/1.8g sells for $800, the Samyang 24/1.4 for about $500 and the Tamron for $1,200 at B and H.

What would you do?

I would buy a lens that was useful for landscapes, certainly not an ultra-wide, and not a high speed lens.

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/05/24/five-lenses-for-the-discerning-landscape-photographer/#.VM_CR_8tGM8

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm

MW

Steven A Lewis wrote:

I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being extremely sharp and I have heard very good things about the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 for full frame. Dxmark has not rated either the Nikon 20/1.8g or the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 with VC.

The Nikon 20/1.8g sells for $800, the Samyang 24/1.4 for about $500 and the Tamron for $1,200 at B and H.

What would you do?

I would at least think about the older model Nikon 20mm. For landscape photography f/2.8 is already a larger aperture than I could imagine needing, let alone f/1.8.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

MW wrote:

I would at least think about the older model Nikon 20mm. For landscape photography f/2.8 is already a larger aperture than I could imagine needing, let alone f/1.8.

For landscape photography you will be shooting at a small aperture to try and bring everything into focus, for night skies and astrophotography f/2.8 can be important.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Wendy2 wrote:

See if you can rent them. That way you will get first hand experience with each lens and never wonder if you made the right choice.

+ 1

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Steven A Lewis wrote:

I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being extremely sharp and I have heard very good things about the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 for full frame. Dxmark has not rated either the Nikon 20/1.8g or the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 with VC.

The Nikon 20/1.8g sells for $800, the Samyang 24/1.4 for about $500 and the Tamron for $1,200 at B and H.

What would you do?

I would get the Samyang, and I I would favor doing multiexposure panos in the vertical orientation with it - if possible.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

imagemeister wrote:

I would get the Samyang, and I I would favor doing multiexposure panos in the vertical orientation with it - if possible.

Why use a super wide to do multiexposure panos? Just wondering. I'd rather something more towards normal.

erickter Loc: Dallas,TX

Steven A Lewis wrote:

I have a d610 and take primarily landscape photos. I was set to buy a Nikon 20/1.8g until I began looking at alternatives. Dxmark rates the Samyang 24/1.4 as being extremely sharp and I have heard very good things about the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 for full frame. Dxmark has not rated either the Nikon 20/1.8g or the new Tamron 15 to 30/2.8 with VC.

The Nikon 20/1.8g sells for $800, the Samyang 24/1.4 for about $500 and the Tamron for $1,200 at B and H.

What would you do?

I had the Nikon 20mm Ais, 24mm, Nikon 17-30, and Nikon 16mm fisheye. Great lenses. used them sparingly, and they cost a lot. Have lots of Nikon quality glass left, but for the super wide, got a used Sigma art lens 15-30, and love it. Blows away any negative myths. This this is tack sharp across the full range, and the contrast and color are superb. As sharp as the Nikon 17-30 pro gold lens, which I also owned and did inter architecture shots with. Sold that too. Kept the sigma. $280 used, about $800 new. Worth about 3 to 5 times that. Difference used for other toys and good old cash reserves.

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

Steven A Lewis wrote:

What would you do?

Make a drink.
Oh wait, I already have one....

I am not in your league, I shoot DX.
But I got a really highly acclaimed 10-24mm refurbished lens from Nikon, and have been very happy with it.
I'd suggest you try starting there. :thumbup:

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

SteveR wrote:

Why use a super wide to do multiexposure panos? Just wondering. I'd rather something more towards normal.

Most do not consider 24 as a "super wide" - I do not - but anything wider is. And yes, I agree with you - I would personally like 28mm or 35 a little better - but 24 is certainly doable and it can double as a single exposure solution....also. I have used and rather like a 20mm on APSc ( 30mm equiv.). Many people use wider than 24 in their panos ! - but that is where I would draw the line.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

imagemeister wrote:

Most do not consider 24 as a "super wide" - I do not - but anything wider is. And yes, I agree with you - I would personally like 28mm or 35 a little better - but 24 is certainly doable and it can double as a single exposure solution....also. I have used and rather like a 20mm on APSc ( 30mm equiv.). Many people use wider than 24 in their panos ! - but that is where I would draw the line.

And, you could certainly crop a bit if you had to.....