AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

mentalcare

mentalcare

Member
Member's gallery
Hello.

I am considering buying AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f / 2.8G ED. It has been highly praised through the ages.
No doubt it is sharp etc. but my concerns are:

1. It is based on 13-year-old technology, there has happened a lot since then.

2. I have read a review where he writes: “Unfortunately, when using the lens on a high-resolution camera body such as the Nikon D810, the Nikon 14-24mm f / 2.8G showed a serious weakness that must be pointed out. The lens exhibited pronounced focus shift at all focal lengths” (photographylife.com/reviews/)

It should run on my D850 and match the quality of my 105/1.4 and 70-200E FL/2.8.
I intend to use AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f / 2.8G ED for landscape and fun close-ups.
I know there are alternatives that are cheaper but also heavier and more clumsy. Price is not that important - but sharpness is very important to me. I mean, it's probably razor sharp, but it might not matter if it's sharpened in the wrong place!
Do I have cause for concern?

Best regards, and have a nice weekend
Jesper
 
Member's gallery
I don't own one... but I would be careful to read into what one person says about anything... the 12-24 lens has been a flagship Nikon lens for A LONG time... I find it very hard to believe that it's not a great lens. Looking at most reviews I have seen they rave about the lens.
 
Member's gallery
gordon_g said:
I don't own one... but I would be careful to read into what one person says about anything... the 12-24 lens has been a flagship Nikon lens for A LONG time... I find it very hard to believe that it's not a great lens. Looking at most reviews I have seen they rave about the lens.
Click to expand...

Nasim's review of the 14-24 mm lens is excellent and his findings of focus shift are backed up by Lloyd Chambers (Diglloyd). When stopped down from wide open, focus shifts forward. This can be compensated for to some extent by biasing focus to account for the shift, but this is problematic since you don't how much bias to apply. Both Nasim and Lloyd recommend focusing this lens via live view at f/4-f/5.6. I do own the lens and have been satisfied with the results, but like Nasim I would not buy the lens at this time should it be damaged or stolen.

Another way to deal with focus shift is to focus stack and this is relatively simple in landscape work with the D850 which has automated focus stacking. This also deals with curvature of field which is present in this lens.

Bill
 
Strodav said:
Personally, I went with the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 art. It is heavy and bulky comparatively, but more glass usually means better quality hence more weight. If you are concerned about size, weight, IQ issues with zooms, then go with primes.
Click to expand...
Same here, it’s great. But I don’t know how it compares with Nikon.
 
Member's gallery
It's a great lens. I used it almost to the point of wearing it out for landscape work and only had an issue with focus shift on the rarest of occasions (although I do use Live View most of the time for landscapes). Still, I think the worry about focus shift with that lens is a bit overblown. The only time it's really a problem is for very close work in my experience.
 
Member's gallery
I’ve been using this lens with the D800E and nowadays the Z7 with FTZ and I wouldn’t name focus shift to be the real issue.
The real issue is the fact this lens doesn’t work with normal screw on filters so you need to buy into a Lee (like I did) or an equivalent (expensive) filtersystem and on top of this it’s able to flare no matter what you do.
Yup! bulky and a pita if you want to be fast, but I’d buy one again.
I’ve heard good reviews on the Sigma but I’m a brand loyalist LOL
 
Member's gallery
Thern said:
I’ve been using this lens with the D800E and nowadays the Z7 with FTZ and I wouldn’t name focus shift to be the real issue.
The real issue is the fact this lens doesn’t work with normal screw on filters so you need to buy into a Lee (like I did) or an equivalent (expensive) filtersystem and on top of this it’s able to flare no matter what you do.
Yup! bulky and a pita if you want to be fast, but I’d buy one again.
I’ve heard good reviews on the Sigma but I’m a brand loyalist LOL
Click to expand...

According to a preview article in PhotographyLife, Nikon has announced a 14-24 f/2.8 S lens for mirrorless full frame. It is quite expensive (US $2399) but is said to surpass the 14-24 f/2.8 G in every way. Its front element is less bulbous than that of the 12-24 G and it can take 112 mm screw in filters with an attached lens hood. Users that have the Z cameras or are contemplating switching to mirrorless should keep this in mind. Since Nikon seems to be focusing much of their efforts on mirrorless, I doubt that an upgrade of the 14-24 G is likely.

I don't have the Sigma 14-24 f/2.8 Art, but it is reportedly quite good and is another option for dSLRs.

Bill
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
It's a great lens. I used it almost to the point of wearing it out for landscape work and only had an issue with focus shift on the rarest of occasions (although I do use Live View most of the time for landscapes). Still, I think the worry about focus shift with that lens is a bit overblown. The only time it's really a problem is for very close work in my experience.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply, I think I'll go for it. If I don't like it, I reserve the right to blame you ;).
Do you have the time to explain to me why the focus shift is a bigger problem using viewfinder instead of using live view? Perhaps you already have made a video about the subject? I'm old school and used to use my viewfinder.
Best regards
Jesper
 
Member's gallery
Seems like a good enough lens on my D850 as well. Not one of my most used lenses, but it was worth what I paid for it. The 16-35mm F4VR (which I also have) has less distortion, but less range of course. I prefer the 16-35mm F4 for video work and the 14-24 for tight spaces or vast landscapes.
 
Member's gallery
mentalcare said:
Thank you for your reply, I think I'll go for it. If I don't like it, I reserve the right to blame you ;).
Do you have the time to explain to me why the focus shift is a bigger problem using viewfinder instead of using live view? Perhaps you already have made a video about the subject? I'm old school and used to use my viewfinder.
Best regards
Jesper
Click to expand...

I am not Steve, but I will add my 2 cents. With regard to focus shift, it does not occur if you focus at the taking aperture. With viewfinder focusing you are usually focusing with the lens wide open and it stops down to the taking aperture when you shoot. If there is focus shift with the lens, the focused distance would change with stopping down, usually moving forward.

In live view, focusing is done at the taking aperture so there is no focus shift. If you are shooting at apertures narrower than f/5.6, depth of field increases and the image darkens, making focusing that much more uncertain. In these cases it is suggested to focus at f/4 or f/5.6 via live view and then stop down for exposure.

Also, live view focusing with contrast detection is the most accurate focusing mode. There is no need for focus fine tuning. Also, you can magnify view to check focus. LV is my method of choice with landscape and macro. If you don't have it, I would recommend getting Steve's autofocus book. I have found it very helpful.

Bill
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I owned the F mount, loved it, then sold it after ignoring wide angle work for too long, then regretted selling it almost immediately :) It was a great lens, and yah that bulbous head was to be careful of and if you're going to be using filters a lot there's lots of 3rd party systems that work with the lens (and not as annoying as screw on filters). I just took possession of the Z 14-24 today and am looking very much forward to testing it in the mountains next week. Go for it, it is by virtually all accounts one of Nikon's finest lenses.
 
Member's gallery
bjanes said:
I am not Steve, but I will add my 2 cents. With regard to focus shift, it does not occur if you focus at the taking aperture. With viewfinder focusing you are usually focusing with the lens wide open and it stops down to the taking aperture when you shoot. If there is focus shift with the lens, the focused distance would change with stopping down, usually moving forward.

In live view, focusing is done at the taking aperture so there is no focus shift. If you are shooting at apertures narrower than f/5.6, depth of field increases and the image darkens, making focusing that much more uncertain. In these cases it is suggested to focus at f/4 or f/5.6 via live view and then stop down for exposure.

Also, live view focusing with contrast detection is the most accurate focusing mode. There is no need for focus fine tuning. Also, you can magnify view to check focus. LV is my method of choice with landscape and macro. If you don't have it, I would recommend getting Steve's autofocus book. I have found it very helpful.

Bill
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for your advice and your explanation, now I have a better understanding. I have 1 hr ago bought the book :).
Best to you and thanx again
Jesper
 
Member's gallery
ssheipel said:
I owned the F mount, loved it, then sold it after ignoring wide angle work for too long, then regretted selling it almost immediately :) It was a great lens, and yah that bulbous head was to be careful of and if you're going to be using filters a lot there's lots of 3rd party systems that work with the lens (and not as annoying as screw on filters). I just took possession of the Z 14-24 today and am looking very much forward to testing it in the mountains next week. Go for it, it is by virtually all accounts one of Nikon's finest lenses.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your answer. I am allmost sure I have made up my mind. Monday morning I will be on my way to my dealer 📸.
Best regards
Jesper
 
Member's gallery
mentalcare said:
Thank you for your reply, I think I'll go for it. If I don't like it, I reserve the right to blame you ;).
Do you have the time to explain to me why the focus shift is a bigger problem using viewfinder instead of using live view? Perhaps you already have made a video about the subject? I'm old school and used to use my viewfinder.
Best regards
Jesper
Click to expand...
Actually, pretty much what Bill said in his reply. :)
 
Member's gallery
When I bought the 14-24mm lens in 2007 it was sharper than any prime in its zoom range from Nikon or Canon. It is sharper than the 16-35mm f/4 and this was easily seen with a 12MP D3 camera's images. For a lighter and less expensive lens and one that uses standard 77mm screw on filters, take a look at the Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5G lens which is midway in sharpness between the 14-24mm and the 16-35mm zooms from Nikon.

Although I appreciate being able to go to 14mm with the lens I also recognize that wider often means weaker with landscape photography as a result of both the perspective distortion and the need to fill the frame with items of interest. I could get by quite easily with a 24-45mm zoom lens for my landscape photography.
 
Member's gallery
With introduction of the Z mount 14-24 f/2.8 there has been a major price drop on the F-mount version. Now down to $1350 at B&H in the US. Not sure on European pricing. By the way, I have one and love it though still working to master it!
 
Member's gallery
mentalcare said:
Hello.

I am considering buying AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f / 2.8G ED. It has been highly praised through the ages.
No doubt it is sharp etc. but my concerns are:

1. It is based on 13-year-old technology, there has happened a lot since then.

2. I have read a review where he writes: “Unfortunately, when using the lens on a high-resolution camera body such as the Nikon D810, the Nikon 14-24mm f / 2.8G showed a serious weakness that must be pointed out. The lens exhibited pronounced focus shift at all focal lengths” (photographylife.com/reviews/)

It should run on my D850 and match the quality of my 105/1.4 and 70-200E FL/2.8.
I intend to use AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f / 2.8G ED for landscape and fun close-ups.
I know there are alternatives that are cheaper but also heavier and more clumsy. Price is not that important - but sharpness is very important to me. I mean, it's probably razor sharp, but it might not matter if it's sharpened in the wrong place!
Do I have cause for concern?

Best regards, and have a nice weekend
Jesper
Click to expand...
Look at Tamron.The15-30 2,B g2 version, Read the reviews. I'm days away from getting one . Less $ and great quality. Already have te 24-70 and 70=200, both are exceptional, To me anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top