Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra
    I guess because you have the 24-70, it's a tougher choice between the 2 lenses.

    I have never liked the 24-70, so obviously I come from a different perspective than you.

    that's just my 2c
    I agreed..

    For me, that 24-70 is my bread butter lens...

  2. #22
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kit View Post
    You bought it? With the D700?
    It's been a while already bro... he got it very soon after.

  3. #23
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    BTW, Tokina 17-35/4 is out... can use filters... so more choice. Price at adorama is only 700+ USD.

  4. #24

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    I share the same sentiments & rationale here. For me, if its only 1 lens its the 24-70mm, if its a 2 lens combo with wide & tele, then its the 16-35 for the extra reach at the long end which serves as standard "normal" lens, compared to 24 which is rather limiting & restrictive. This minimises lens change & fit my shooting style. The best lens is the one I use most often over & over with ease, confidence & satisfaction. Since TS already own one of the "trinity" lens & its a main workhorse, the 14-24 seems more fitting then.

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    I guess because you have the 24-70, it's a tougher choice between the 2 lenses.

    For me, I went for 16-35VR for the following reasons:

    - cheaper and lighter, especially of concern to me when travelling.
    - VR quite beneficial at times
    - focal range useful as a main lens, and switch to fast primes of 50 and 85mm when requiring thin DOF.
    - can use screw-on filters

    I have never liked the 24-70, so obviously I come from a different perspective than you.

    that's just my 2c
    Last edited by s1221ljc; 18th October 2011 at 10:19 AM.

  5. #25
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kit View Post
    You bought it? With the D700?
    ~cough cough~
    Exploring! :)

  6. #26
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    Quote Originally Posted by bethpapa74 View Post
    I agreed..

    For me, that 24-70 is my bread butter lens...
    fair enough...
    I wish you good luck in your selection!
    Exploring! :)

  7. #27
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,642

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    ~cough cough~
    cough cough.... i got..... cough cough..... one too..... cough cough.....

  8. #28
    Member jackyboyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    83

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    14-24 to complete your "Hebrew Trinity" setup as 24-70 is your bread and butter.
    D700|50 F1.4D|24-85|24-70 F2.8|Zeiss 1,4/85 ZF.2|SB900|MBD10

  9. #29

    Default Re: nikon16-35/f4 or nikon14-24/f2.8 for FX? (><)

    Hmm looking at your posts, forget the 16-35. Its "plasticky" not big macho full metal pro gear like the 14-24 & it wont allow you to show off your gears or their IQs

    For me, if a lens cannot use filters, its a definite no-no, not so much because of limited creative use, but from experiences in my travels. Without the protection of filters & exposed to the elements, in no time the lens would be badly disfigured, scarred by dirt, grime, scratches etc, just like what happened to my ex filters. This is especially so if the lens is used near the sea, beaches.
    Last edited by s1221ljc; 18th October 2011 at 03:00 PM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •