New Nikon 14-24 today

[Steiner]

Bought it again - received it today.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

View attachment 241461


Bought it for my D200 in February, but there was - for me unexpected at that time - to much flare/ghosting, so I send it back.

Later I have learned (BJørn Rørslett), that there can be a hidden disadvantage using FX-lenses on DX-cameras.


But whatever .......I have to work around it.

Was SO much in doubt:

Should it be:

The 14-24,
The 17-35,
The Zeiss 35 f/2.0 or
The Zeiss 18 f/3.5


....for my 6 days old Nikon D700 (sold my beloved Tokina 11-16, because I also sold my D200 and 18-200 to raise the money).


But some pics from the 14-24 on FX, also with the sun in the image, gave me the last push.

 

[Randy]

congrats !

 

[Steiner]

Thank you very much, Randy.

 

[Randy]

Thank you very much, Randy.

tg i don't shoot WA or i'd have even more to buy :smile:
my widest lens is the 50 1.4 (i don't cnt the 18-200 since it's a vacation only lens)

 

[rotxlk82]

Nice looking lens you got there, the front element is huge

 

[pforsell]

Congrats Steinar, you got the best of the best.

 

[Jim_C]

Later I have learned (BJørn Rørslett), that there can be a hidden disadvantage using FX-lenses on DX-cameras.

Do you have a link/reference to this information? I'm curious what BJørn has to say about this topic.

- Jim

 

[gadgetguy11]

Congrats - truly a wonderful lens!

 

[Richard Peters]

That really is one large front element! Look forward to seeing some photos from it!

 

[Steiner]

Thank you Peter, Jahn and all.

No I do not have a link, but I can search my pc for his lines, it was a discussion I raised and discussed with him because I was so disapointed about all the flare/ghosting X) -


10 minutes and I will be back with it - I think.


X I shot with the 14-24 on D200 some hours (lended/borrowed the lens), and it was so fantastic, and I thought there were no flaws, but the weather was overcast, so I did not pay attention to that issue, and when I got it and the sun was shining it was another story - also got 3 ghosts with only some lamps.

But the sharpness .... amazing, so I ordered it again for my new FX, and hope it is less on FX, but even not - I want this sharpness.

 

[Steiner]

Bjørn Rørslett:

There is a hidden disadvantage using FX/135mm format lenses on a DX camera. These lenses may record a "cropped" image, but their angle of view isn't altered so they "see" and transmit light from a much larger area than you observe in the viewfinder. Hence they exacerbate the proneness to flare and ghosting for two reasons (a) the extra light captured isn't image-forming so can only add to the general level of flare, and (b) point lights outside the recorded area might make nasty contributions to ghosting and flare. Remember the "recorded" area seen in the image is smaller than what the lens itself captures. The "cropping" doesn't occur in front of the lens and many people tend to overlook this trivial fact.

 

[Paul.r.lindqvist]

Well im afraid that the flare/ghosting wont be gone on FX (not from my experience anyway)

Its impossible with that portruding front element, regardless the lens is amazing and is a blast.

Congrats on the re-acquisition.

 

[Steiner]

Thank you, Paul, and no... I do not expect, that it is gone, but I hope it is less.

 

[yemmi]

Congrats you,Steinar.
It's one of the best lens.

 

[Steiner]

Thank you Yemmi.

 

[spalding12]

you'll LOVE this lens
congrats
enjoy

 

[Steiner]

I am sure, thank you Greg.

 

[vladik1980]

It sure is a Marvel of modern technology Congrads!

 

[jmacd27]

I'd love to have that lens, I hope you enjoy it.

 

[Steiner]

Thank you Vladik - I certainly will, jmacd.