Does this 14 2.8D look ok to you?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by GenoP754, Oct 12, 2005.

  1. I happened to get this at a good deal, however I can return it if I don't like it. I really wish I shot this on my D2X, however this is all I had with me at the time.

    What do you think.....I can't find anything wrong with it, but I haven't had it long enough. I also have the 12-24, but this seems much sharper. I will need to take an ultra wide for some landscapes next week and can't decide which to bring.

    I will try to post a D2X sample soon.

    GenoP

    Nikon D50 ,Nikkor 14mm f/2.8D ED AF
    1/60s f/8.0 at 14.0mm
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Looks fine, lines are straight, colors are beautiful. I don't see any CA.

    A bit blurry on the far left side, but that's measurebating.

    Since you need superwide, isn't your 12-24 okay? Or are you just looking for a reason to add new Glass? (I know I have this disease...!)
     
  3. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    CA is visible to me in this D50 shot, but just wait until you try this lens on a D2X - then you would better brace yourself for some real CA :frown:

    A pity because the 14 mm is a very nice and well-performing lens on my F5, it was this too with the D1, but with all later Nikon DLSRs, the CA is just too much and it tends to destroy image sharpness as well. With D2X, you once again see the potential sharpness of the 14/2.8, but unfortunately, not without ushering the bad CA concurrently.
     
  4. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Hi Geno,
    Really great to hear from you :>))
    Heck I even had to resort to saying hello to you on the OTHER forum... :>))

    Right outside BH hummmm..

    Looked like a gloomy day. Nice image though. Can't comment on the lens, because I know nothing of it.

    Look foward to some more of your work. Don't be a stranger ...
     
  5. Bjorn,

    I know this lens has been criticized a lot on Digital and of course, since I haven't used it I can't comment at all. But it looks to keep lines very straight and the colors are nice.

    About the CA, where do you see it in the picture? I guess there always is CA in those kinds of pictures, in the sky, but I don't see any abnormal CA in the pic...
     
  6. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    Lines are nice, yes, but you do see CA along the white lines on the asphalt and the signpost on the left, just to mention a few obvious areas.
     
  7. The blurry on the left could actually be the way I focused.....but interestingly it seems fine in the upper left. I see it in the lower left though. Could be the angle of the shot.

    As far as the 12-24......I like that the 14 focuses much closer; plus it's a 2.8. I am thinking of replacing the 12-24. I am also thinking down the road Nikon will eventually have to come up with a full frame......Too much competition from Canon for them not to offer one.....even if they keep the DX line. The 12-24 puzzles me as it is so good at 17-24.....however when I really want the ultra wide is when I really need the 12....it's not as good. I have taken some indoors shots with the 14 and don't see the CA I hear about....but flash pictures aren't really a good representation. I will need to shoot some ultra wide landscapes next week and my thought is I will shoot both the 12-24 and the 14 to make a comparison. So what I have seen of the 14 it does seem to outperform the 12-24.....but I really need some good weather to give it a better eveluation on the D2X. I leave on Saturday and would love to take only one lens, but it seems I will have to take both. I think a year or two from now Nikon may end up giving us that full frame and the DX line will become worth a lot less. Trying to see into the future is rough, but I have played with a 5D recently and it is rather impresive to see the 24-70 2.8 where it belongs. I will say I am really happy with the 17-55 and shoot it from 2.8-5.6 all the time and it's on my camera almost all the time. I start to see some diffraction even at f8 though.....I would actually love to get back to a 17-35 2.8D on a full frame and shoot a D2X for telephoto. The perfect combo. I also still have an F5 and would love to shoot the 14 with some film from time to time. Sometimes it actually feels like I am going backwards.

    GenoP
     
  8. Bjørn Thanks

    Bjørn,

    Boy do you have a great eye......I guess I still need some more training on this kind of thing. After you mentioned this I blew up the original NEF and I really see it.......

    Hmmmmm....what do I do? Did you keep yours even though you now have the 12-24? I will be shooting in Yosemite next week and it's important I get the best of the best.....I may just stick close to the 17-55...I am also thinking of bringing some small primes....20 2.8D, 28 1.4D, 35 2D, 45 2.8P.

    GenoP
     
  9. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    Yes, I kept mine. Selling lenses isn't my preferred solution, I rather keep them :smile: A friend has had it on "permanent" leave for 1-2 years, and I might press it into service on an F3 in an Aquatica housing - if I ever shoot film again, that is. The idea of shooting film seems more far-fetched now than it did a few years ago.
     
  10. Bjorn! Okayyyyy I get it! So you write a review about a lens being bad and those "bad signs" are so tiny. Incredible. Yes, you got a great eye.

    Okay now, what shoes is the girl wearing? Nike or Reebok? :tongue:
     
  11. nfoto

    nfoto Guest

    Come on, this is a tiny web photo. And you should see the results from using the 14 mm on a D2X. Probably that would cure your irony for a while.
     
  12. Hi Bjorn,

    I was only kidding and actually impressed.
     
  13. Test at store

    Thanks for your time....everyone...

    OK so I went back to the store and returned the lens. I was thinking of getting a new 17-35 as I have sold my old one when I got the 17-55. I was thinking the 17-35 would be better stopped down. Upon looking at some test images there I was shocked to see CA on the 17-35 also in the corner. Not as much as the 14, but the 17-55 seemed to be the best....Here are the results:

    This is a crude test with flash, however I often have to shoot with flash so it's kind of is a fair test of how I might shoot them. All crops are at 200% on a D2X shot at 1/60th - f 8 hand held. The best I can do under the circumstances....... The first shot is a web size so you can see where the crop came from - Upper left hand corner......boy am I tough..LOL

    Obviously you can see why I decided to stick with the 17-55 as my main lens....Now I just have to test the 12-24 in the same range.

    Nikon D2x ,Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX
    1/60s f/8.0 at 17.0mm iso160 with Flash
    [​IMG]

    Nikon D2x ,Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S
    1/60s f/8.0 at 17.0mm iso160 with Flash
    [​IMG]

    Nikon D2x ,Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX
    1/60s f/8.0 at 17.0mm iso160 with Flash
    [​IMG]

    Nikon D2x ,Nikkor 14mm f/2.8D ED AF
    1/60s f/8.0 at 14.0mm iso160 with Flash
    [​IMG]
     
  14. Gale

    Hi Gale,

    Great to hear from you....also on the other location....I guess the 24-120VR is holding up. I really ended up missing it so I got another one to marry to my D50. I am headed west on Saturday and when I get back i may decide to sell some stuff again.....Got my eyes on the 500 4. I got one I can use in CA for a day with a friend....so we will see if it's in the cards.

    GenoP

    PS: I was outside B&H to pick up a Coolwalker for my trip. I looked at the Epson...however it was twice as much money. The screen isn't that important to me....I just wanna make sure I have enough storage for a week of shooting uncompressed D2X files.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 12, 2005
  15. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Geno

    The 24-120 is well and safe and my favorite lens.

    500 f4 wow. Nice glass. Not something I will ever have,

    Harry B lets me drool on his now and again :>)))

    Good shooting to you.
    Please stop back again soon.
     
Loading...