The Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 Totally Destroys Canon's 14mm f/2.8L II Prime!!

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Rita Ä Berkowitz, Dec 22, 2007.

  1. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Paul Furman Guest

    Ah, OK I see how that makes sense. I have a 30mm medium format fisheye
    and made a rig to do that with, though I'm not sure I'd have the need to
    stitch a huge fisheye poster... I use it more for tilting the focus plane.
     
    Paul Furman, Dec 25, 2007
    #81
    1. Advertisements

  2. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Max Perl Guest

    Could be interresting to see how the 15/2.8 handles on a M8. Is there any
    trace of CA in the corners.....etc. Else the old classic 21 mm for the
    Contarex
    is nice I think......also as a collectors item.
     
    Max Perl, Dec 25, 2007
    #82
    1. Advertisements

  3. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Max Perl Guest

    Yes the adapter is made so you can take a number of images utilizing the big
    image circle of the LF lens. Then you do not need to think about the nodal
    point etc.
    The stitch program will be happy I think :)

    You could also use the shift function to get 2 rows of 3 or 4 images......to
    get a
    double high panorama image.....like people use the 28/3.5 PC-Nikkor.
    The problem is to get the time to play with all these possibilities........
    :)
     
    Max Perl, Dec 25, 2007
    #83
  4. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Tony Polson Guest


    I haven't seen a ZM 15mm Biogon, let alone tried one. Nor have I
    tried a ZM 85mm f/2 Sonnar. But I have tried all the other ZM lenses
    on an M8 body, including some comparative tests with Leica lenses of
    the same focal lengths. The ZM lenses are outstanding performers on
    the M8, and they have no need of the Leica 6-bit coding. I expect the
    ZM 15mm and 85mm lenses will be equally impressive.


    Until 2007, it was the best 21mm lens for Leica M - obviously, it has
    to be used with an adapter. The new Carl Zeiss ZM C Sonnar 21mm f/4.5
    is a modern interpretation of this classic design, and not only does
    it display near-zero distortion, but it is sharp right out to the
    corners, even wide open. An outstanding achievement. For me, this is
    easily the best new lens of 2007.
     
    Tony Polson, Dec 25, 2007
    #84
  5. Right -- however, I'm in no hurry to dump them. One or two like the 135/2.8
    have appreciated considerably and may appreciate more, since Sony as far as
    I know does not make an equivalent fixed-focal-length lens. Others like some
    wide-angle zooms, fisheye etc. aren't so attractive today because they won't
    deliver the wide angle on Sony's present line, but will when and if Sony
    brings out a full-frame model. The others I'll sell as I get time to do so.

    Yes, but the nice new Nikkors I want I've been buying anyway. I don't need
    the money from selling these lenses.

    I *do* wish I'd sold all those Minolta bodies when I could still have gotten
    a good price for them. They're all about mint and in the original boxes, but
    probably won't bring much now.

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Dec 25, 2007
    #85
  6. You may be right, but I'm just not interested in selling any bodies except
    those from camera brands or types I've abandoned.

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Dec 25, 2007
    #86
  7. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Max Perl Guest

    It has always been pleasure to turn the focus ring on a Contarex lens.

    On my D2x I have not until now seen a super wide which did not have
    any trace of CA in the corners. E.g. if you have some trees with small
    branches and leaves against the sky. Here you can always find some
    trace of e.g. red/blue CA. We will see if Zeiss makes a biogon with
    Nikon mount.
     
    Max Perl, Dec 25, 2007
    #87
  8. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Tony Polson Guest


    Probably the best made SLR ever!


    We live in interesting times ... :)
     
    Tony Polson, Dec 26, 2007
    #88
  9. True, but the point is to never leave unwanted money on the table. Make it
    work for you in new equipment or in some type of investment. Give it to
    your grandchildren.
    Probably true, but you never know. Then again, since they are film bodies
    you can still have a great time with them. The type of film you put in them
    only limits you.





    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Dec 26, 2007
    #89
  10. The 14-24/2.8 is going to be a sweet lens. I don't particularly care for it
    because there are no provisions for a filter. I'll be sticking with my
    17-35/2.8. The 17-55/2.8 is a DX lens and probably should be avoided. Get
    a 17-35/2.8






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Dec 26, 2007
    #90
  11. I'm through with film forever. Cannot imagine any circumstances in which I'd
    go back, even occasionally. It breaks my heart that I'll have no further use
    for my magnificent Durst A300 (autofocus with 50/2.8 EL Nikkor), but there
    you are. I should have listened to my friend who advised me to go 100%
    digital and sell all my 35mm stuff a few years ago.

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Dec 26, 2007
    #91
  12. Rita Ä Berkowitz

    Max Perl Guest

    Maybe......they just selected the wrong type of shutter? The Nikon F was
    more successful......and they came out same year.....1959?


    Yes.....but the Zeiss 50/1.4 was not 100% convincing. At least not the
    test results I have seen. So I still keep my Nikkor 50/2 and 50/1.8 :)
     
    Max Perl, Dec 26, 2007
    #92
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.