14-24mm nikon or 17-35mm 2.8? anyone? help...


mlvglb

New Member
Feb 7, 2011
8
0
0
#1
‎14-24mm nikon or 17-25mm 2.8?
anyone? help...

i will use one of those lens to shoot weddings... and i dont want to create too many distortion...

so.. any suggestion?

i appreciate it..

Thank you...

mlvglb
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#2
Are u using FX or DX?
On FX, the 14-24mm might be abit too wide as a one zoom staple lens.
On FX the 24-70mm is a great option, the 24mm covers a table shot, while the 70mm gives a little isolation.

( one of the fav for wedding photog was the 17-55mm DX lens on a DX sensor )

Different folks different strokes, u will find folks who swear by either above mentioned.

Ryan
 

brapodam

New Member
Jun 12, 2009
1,672
4
0
AMK
#3
17-35. 14-24 is too wide for weddings, even on DX. But of course that depends on how you use your lenses
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#5
17-35. 14-24 is too wide for weddings, even on DX. But of course that depends on how you use your lenses
Not to mention too heavy and intimidating with that protruding large round front element... :bigeyes:
 

SnagIt

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2010
521
0
16
33
#7
Old same advice:

14-24mm: have too much money, obsessed about sharpness and distortion
17-35mm: cheaper, lighter, more practical choice, can do filters

Side note: 24-70: Best for wedding(FF)
 

Mar 17, 2010
1,388
0
0
#9
the 14-24 is really :thumbsup:.

probably you should try using one before deciding.

extremely sharp. no issues shooting at f/2.8 during a ballroom function.

bad thing is the weight, as well as the huge front element (cannot attach filter).
 

mlvglb

New Member
Feb 7, 2011
8
0
0
#10
Thank you all for your comments.. i really appreciate it.. i think i'm going to choose 14-24mm.. :)
one of my great photography mentor use 17-35mm.. that's why i'm confuse.. should i follow his step or buy 14-24..

anyway.. Thanks!
 

Top Bottom