NIKON 14-24mm lens.
Dec 25, 2018 06:06:44 #
tcthome
Loc: NJ
I have CPLs for my lenses, but don't use them all that frequently. Best for very bright days and for toning down reflections. I like shooting on days that are slightly overcast or at dawn or dusk.
I like your fuzzy spiders!
Susan[/quote]
you will need a 150 mm filter system for this lens. eg, nisi, lee etc.
I like your fuzzy spiders!
Susan[/quote]
you will need a 150 mm filter system for this lens. eg, nisi, lee etc.
Dec 25, 2018 06:31:29 #
I use it quite a bit for landscapes with some realty thrown in. No complaints other than the weight of it. I'd rather use the 16-35mm ƒ4 for real estate and architectural. The issues others mention don't bother me one bit cause none really matter to me. I have been using the Nikon 20mm ƒ1.8 a bit more lately as a carry around wide. Love all three and all serve a purpose for me, that's all that matters.
Dec 25, 2018 07:06:32 #
I have used it for landscape such as parks, also have the Lee filters for it.
RickTaylor wrote:
Wondering where most people use this lens. I know it is the first part of the trinity. Just curious as to where members have found a use for this that make it their go to lens for a specific application
Taken at park with 14-24 (Lobster Cloud)
(Download)
Same park with 14-24 (trees reflection)
(Download)
Dec 25, 2018 07:34:28 #
IDguy wrote:
16-35?
But my 16-35 has VR. Otherwise comment applies.
But my 16-35 has VR. Otherwise comment applies.
I was referring to the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G ED Lens.
Dec 25, 2018 07:40:10 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
RickTaylor wrote:
Wondering where most people use this lens. I know it is the first part of the trinity. Just curious as to where members have found a use for this that make it their go to lens for a specific application
Mostly used for landscape photography. Lee filter system is very expensive for this lens as it requires a special housing to hold large filters. This is why I sold my 14-24 mm in favor of the Nikon 16-35 mm that takes standard filter sizes and Lee filters are much less expensive.
The cool thing about the Nikon 14-24 is that it stays as sharp as primes throughout it's zoom range. Simply the best ultra-wide zoom lens on the market today.
Dec 25, 2018 07:58:37 #
JD750 wrote:
From my Lightroom Catalog (about 1/2 of my total images):
Total No images: 27525
Taken with D750: 13174
14-24mm F2.8: 98
24-70mm F2.8: 7657
70-200mm F2.8: 1403
Total No images: 27525
Taken with D750: 13174
14-24mm F2.8: 98
24-70mm F2.8: 7657
70-200mm F2.8: 1403
Yes, that is about right for when I had the Nikon gear, D810 and the Trinity...
Dec 25, 2018 08:30:34 #
I use a Tokina 16-28mm instead, and I use it when I am "close-in" to my subject(s). I generally prefer wide to tele.
Dec 25, 2018 08:42:12 #
RickTaylor wrote:
Wondering where most people use this lens. I know it is the first part of the trinity. Just curious as to where members have found a use for this that make it their go to lens for a specific application
I might have been interested in this lens if I did not have the Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8. It is an amazing lens for the landscape that I capture especially where there is excellent foreground interest I am sure that the 14-24mm is amazing as well. PS - VR is not a big deal for me since I am shooting mostly in good light or with a tripod.
Dec 25, 2018 08:49:23 #
My landscape lenses range from 45mm to 150mm - if I want a wider view I just do a stitched pano - much easier to deal with distortion and uneven illumination across the combined angle of view. Oh, and looking at a 150 to 300mp image can bring a smile to your face. I generally prefer the look of a stitched pano when compared to the look of an ultrawide lens - which often has to be cropped to remove some sky and foreground, and corrected in post if you have keystoning.
Dec 25, 2018 10:08:46 #
I have the lens and have to agree. It is not a cost effective lens unless you have big jobs for it. But I do like the lens[
Dec 25, 2018 10:27:29 #
IDguy
Loc: Idaho
JD750 wrote:
A Tripod is the standard solution to the scene you describe.
It is a solution many times unusable when doing real landscapes. VR much more convenient.
Dec 25, 2018 10:30:06 #
IDguy
Loc: Idaho
yssirk123 wrote:
I was referring to the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G ED Lens.
Ah, hadn’t seen that one!
Dec 25, 2018 10:42:05 #
I love this lense but it takes some getting used to-at first your feet will be in the image-at 14 mm it picks up everything in all directions with a cone of vision more than your eye. your subject will appear far in the distance with a lot of asphalt in the foreground at first. extending the tripod to its highest point helps reducing foreground. much distortion. things seem way further away than they are. I find myself pointing it up more often. Its good for landscapes and interiors as someone mentioned. its a great piece of glass for clarity sharpness and color rendition. Its also an 'in your face' type lense. In other words the lense needs to be in the thick of the subject a few feet away at the most. some say its good for 'getting it all in' but its not the point of the lense necessarily, although I have seen some great mountain landscapes and urban tops of skyscrapers images taken with this lense.
Dec 25, 2018 11:25:20 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
brianmcnarch wrote:
I love this lense but it takes some getting used t... (show quote)
An example of new techniques you will learn is positioning the camera level and perhaps in portrait orientation to capture building fronts, then possibly cropping some of the foreground. Keeping the sensor plane parallel to the plane of your subject will hold objectionable distortion to a minimum. You probably noticed that in the examples above, the horizons were all close to the center of the frame. This helps avoid "bent" horizons. You can then crop a little of the bottom or of the top of your image to get the horizon back to a one-third line.
Dec 25, 2018 11:26:59 #
Gene51 wrote:
Ouch!
My 24-70 was also in the bag, as was my D700, and Sigma 150 F2.8 macro. Surprisingly the camera just melted, but the three lenses were ok. I never even bothered to send the macro in - I just cleaned it up and have been using it for the past 6 yrs without issue. My insurance company covered everything.
My 24-70 was also in the bag, as was my D700, and Sigma 150 F2.8 macro. Surprisingly the camera just melted, but the three lenses were ok. I never even bothered to send the macro in - I just cleaned it up and have been using it for the past 6 yrs without issue. My insurance company covered everything.
If I had as much valuable gear as you do, I would have insurance too. You never know when something will go wrong!
Just bought the Nikon 200-500mm and a new camera bag to carry both cameras and all 4 lenses [pre-owned Think Tank Airport International v.2 from eBay], so the value of my gear does increase every year.
We have a white Christmas here! Not a lot of snow, but much prettier than the bare grass!
Susan
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.