Nikon AFS 24mm f1.4G
- Thread starter choon wee
- Start date
fast wide 1.4 prime were never cheap 
that was why nikon discontinuted their 28 1.4 years ago .. coz it was way more expensive than even the 17-35 2.8, not many people bought it
but guess those who really need will still fork out. simply no replacement for it.
that was why nikon discontinuted their 28 1.4 years ago .. coz it was way more expensive than even the 17-35 2.8, not many people bought it
but guess those who really need will still fork out. simply no replacement for it.
Last edited:
fast wide 1.4 prime were never cheap
that was why nikon discontinuted their 28 1.4 years ago .. coz it was way more expensive than even the 17-35 2.8, not many people bought it
but guess those who really need will still fork out. simply no replacement for it.
... actually.. one reason was there is lead content in the body paint...in the 28 f/1.4....
I am curious. Majority of us here (at least I assume that) will not be interested in Canon. So why compare against a Canon?
I suspect we are more interested in comparing the 24 f/1.4 with 24 f/2.0 AIS, 28 f/1.4 or 24-70 f/2.8 (at 24mm), 17-55 f/2.8 (at 24mm). Basically we just want to justify why and when we should buy this 24mm f/1.4G.
I suspect we are more interested in comparing the 24 f/1.4 with 24 f/2.0 AIS, 28 f/1.4 or 24-70 f/2.8 (at 24mm), 17-55 f/2.8 (at 24mm). Basically we just want to justify why and when we should buy this 24mm f/1.4G.
I think the AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4G ED is quite significant to FX shooters. I can imagine this to be really useful for event coverage, for instance.
Haha... I think we should just thank the TS for his contributions.
We're probably more interested in comparing this new prime again the other Nikkors, but unless someone has them all, it's really kinda hard, isn't it?
I don't think the TS owes anyone any analysis on whether the AFS 24/1.4 is better than any other Nikon lens.
Anyway at that price, you'd better find your own reasons for getting it. (hint: 24mm and f1.4)
Can I ask what kind of usage can we put this lens that would justify paying so much for it? I would think that at 24mm focal length, this lens would be more suitable for landscape photography.
Tom,
Personally felt it will be rather ideal for event/wedding photographers for low ligtht shooting, factoring in considerably the weight (if compared apple to apple - 24-70 f2.8 which is 2 full stops slower) and the amt of light it will suck in in tricky lighting conditions :devil:
Last edited:
I must admit that the price is astronomical, but I think it's dependent on the photographer to find a use for it. Ostensibly, Nikon believes that there are sufficient photographers who will appreciate this lens despite its hefty price tag!
Similar threads
