Nikon 14mm F2.8d Ed

[LKY]

Hi,

anyone use this lense before ?

how is the lense quality ?

list price S$3,250. look like is a high end WA lense.

 

[LKY]

haha..... look like everyone is celebrating the born of D200 and 18-200VR.

 

[Astin]

The only thing I know about this lens is that it is very expensive...

 

[LKY]

bro, thx for your response.

ya......i also noted this lense is very expensive. that why want to check anyone got any hand on report.

16mm and 10.5 fisheye are only s$1.3k (list price) nearly 3 times, it must have its selling points, may be is a ED lense

 

[Deville]

i think it's becos 14mm but not fisheye...so it's super wide...

 

[Astin]

bro, thx for your response.

ya......i also noted this lense is very expensive. that why want to check anyone got any hand on report.

16mm and 10.5 fisheye are only s$1.3k (list price) nearly 3 times, it must have its selling points, may be is a ED lense

bro, if I remember correctly, 16mm and 10.5mm are fish eye lens with distortion build-in, and 14mm is non-fish eye and has the optical design to correct the distortion effect.

 

[slacker123]

get the sigma instead 3x cheaper and just as good image quality.

14mm on a nikon digital body can be equalled by a 16-35mm lens @ 16mm on a 1D I/II body.

food for thought.

 

[markccm]

get the sigma instead 3x cheaper and just as good image quality.

14mm on a nikon digital body can be equalled by a 16-35mm lens @ 16mm on a 1D I/II body.

food for thought.

dun understand.... :dunno:

 

[alan1996]

bro, thx for your response.

ya......i also noted this lense is very expensive. that why want to check anyone got any hand on report.

16mm and 10.5 fisheye are only s$1.3k (list price) nearly 3 times, it must have its selling points, may be is a ED lense

I think we are paying the high price for the small F number at a 14mm lens. I think the front lens is around 82mm in size. This lens cannot have any filter in front and the hood is built-in to protect the glass.

 

[Expiredyoghurt]

get the sigma instead 3x cheaper and just as good image quality.

14mm on a nikon digital body can be equalled by a 16-35mm lens @ 16mm on a 1D I/II body.

food for thought.

i dun understand his reasoning either (in the later part)

but as for the sigma 14mm ... look at the image samples ... sharpness ain't quite there ...

 

[LKY]

beside distortion effect correction and small aperture..... wat abt the lense sharpness and color richness.

is a titanium ring like 17-35 and 28-70 should have its selling points.

 

[billkoh]

barely no distortion. great when using with film.

 

[Astin]

barely no distortion. great when using with film.

This feature itself is already worth the $3k price...

 

[gadrian]

Its an awesome lens when used on a film, and was initially very welcomed as it gave a 21mm FOV for Nikon DX format DSLR's.

However, this lens sharpness starts to fall apart on newer DSLR bodies like the D2H/Hs and D2x. On the D100 and D70s its not as sharp as it is on film.

Perhaps you should read more about it from Bjørn Rørslett

 

[gadrian]

oppss.. forgot the link.

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_wide.html

 

[LKY]

Its an awesome lens when used on a film, and was initially very welcomed as it gave a 21mm FOV for Nikon DX format DSLR's.

However, this lens sharpness starts to fall apart on newer DSLR bodies like the D2H/Hs and D2x. On the D100 and D70s its not as sharp as it is on film.

Perhaps you should read more about it from Bjørn Rørslett

now i understand why not so popular.....