My new Z 14-24 S

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).

jhallettbc

jhallettbc

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
I had the old F-mount version and thought it took amazing photos but never used it much because of its weight. I originally thought I'd use it on vacation in Europe for interiors and cityscapes. However when it came time to leave, I'd decide to take my 18-35 f3.5-4.5 because it is so much lighter and smaller. I never regretted leaving the 14-24 at home was alway pleased with the 18-35. In my opinion it is a highly underrated lens. I tested it against a Nikon 16-35 and the 18-35 was better hands down.

Now having mirrorless cameras I revisited what I wanted for a wide angle lens. I borrowed a friend's Z 14-30 and thought it only took slightly better photos than the 18-35 and you really had to look to see the difference. Couldn't see spending the money on one. hen I tried out the Z 14-24 and its sharpness blew me away so I took the plunge and bought it. I've only had it since Saturday but I'm super pleased with the photos. Here's one I took in a Vancouver park today. I don't imagine the sharpness will really show up in a jpeg though. I leaving for Australia this Saturday and I know I'll have many opportunities for amazing landscape shots. I also plan to do some star photography for the first time having read how great it is for that.

Z62_0314.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
jhallettbc said:
I had the old F-mount version and thought it took amazing photos but never used it much because of its weight. I originally thought I'd use it on vacation in Europe for interiors and cityscapes. However when it came time to leave, I'd decide to take my 18-35 f3.5-4.5 because it is so much lighter and smaller. I never regretted leaving the 14-24 at home was alway pleased with the 18-35. In my opinion it is a highly underrated lens. I tested it against a Nikon 16-35 and the 18-35 was better hands down.

Now having mirrorless cameras I revisited what I wanted for a wide angle lens. I borrowed a friend's Z 14-30 and thought it only took slightly better photos than the 18-35 and you really had to look to see the difference. Couldn't see spending the money on one. hen I tried out the Z 14-24 and its sharpness blew me away so I took the plunge and bought it. I've only had it since Saturday but I'm super pleased with the photos. Here's one I took in a Vancouver park today. I don't imagine the sharpness will really show up in a jpeg though. I leaving for Australia this Saturday and I know I'll have many opportunities for amazing landscape shots. I also plan to do some star photography for the first time having read how great it is for that.

View attachment 81554
Click to expand...

It's such a great lens. The only zoom I own that obviates my need for a prime in its range.
 
Member's gallery
@jhallettbc , this is exactly my case! I had F-mount 14-24 and I even took it with me to Africa many times! But it was big and heavy. Meanwhile I have two Z-cameras and sold my F-mount. And I am thinking about Z-mount 14-24 for about 1 year already. Actually, I sold F-mount becasue of it. But still cannot decide to buy Z-mount.
At the moment I use 24/1,4 Sigma and 18/2.8 Zeiss Batis ...
This year I planned some spots in Africa where I have an excellent nightscape opportunity! I used 14-24 primarely for nightscapes.
You told you are going to Australia! How good it is for nightscapes! Do you know a youtube channel "Nightscape Images" from Richard Tati? It is quite a famous channel and he is living in Australia, he is talking also about good locations. I'd recommend to have a look!
And please, please, post your images and make a review about z14-24 for nightscapes and astrophotograpohy when you are back!
 
Member's gallery
jhallettbc said:
I had the old F-mount version and thought it took amazing photos but never used it much because of its weight. I originally thought I'd use it on vacation in Europe for interiors and cityscapes. However when it came time to leave, I'd decide to take my 18-35 f3.5-4.5 because it is so much lighter and smaller. I never regretted leaving the 14-24 at home was alway pleased with the 18-35. In my opinion it is a highly underrated lens. I tested it against a Nikon 16-35 and the 18-35 was better hands down.

Now having mirrorless cameras I revisited what I wanted for a wide angle lens. I borrowed a friend's Z 14-30 and thought it only took slightly better photos than the 18-35 and you really had to look to see the difference. Couldn't see spending the money on one. hen I tried out the Z 14-24 and its sharpness blew me away so I took the plunge and bought it. I've only had it since Saturday but I'm super pleased with the photos. Here's one I took in a Vancouver park today. I don't imagine the sharpness will really show up in a jpeg though. I leaving for Australia this Saturday and I know I'll have many opportunities for amazing landscape shots. I also plan to do some star photography for the first time having read how great it is for that.

View attachment 81554
Click to expand...
I bought this lens when I converted to Z. I had the F mount version for years and years but the Z version is a substantial upgrade (that wide mount comes thru again...lol). And it even takes filters!
Enjoy!
 
Member's gallery
I had the F mount Tamron 15-30 f2.8 G2 until I sold my gear a few months ago and went all in on Z8. Since I don't do astro photography or events, I really didn't need f2.8 (nor could I afford it). I ended up getting the Z 14-30 f4 which is smaller and lighter and cheaper and has longer reach (30mm vs 24mm). Of course the Z 14-24 f2.8 is the best of the best and for those who can afford it and don't mind the extra size and weight, it is the way to go. But for my needs and budget (and I assume many others) the Z 14-30 is a stellar option. In real life use I doubt there is a discernable difference (though I am sure if you pixel peep the f2.8 is a bit sharper).
 
Member's gallery
MrFotoFool said:
I had the F mount Tamron 15-30 f2.8 G2 until I sold my gear a few months ago and went all in on Z8. Since I don't do astro photography or events, I really didn't need f2.8 (nor could I afford it). I ended up getting the Z 14-30 f4 which is smaller and lighter and cheaper and has longer reach (30mm vs 24mm). Of course the Z 14-24 f2.8 is the best of the best and for those who can afford it and don't mind the extra size and weight, it is the way to go. But for my needs and budget (and I assume many others) the Z 14-30 is a stellar option. In real life use I doubt there is a discernable difference (though I am sure if you pixel peep the f2.8 is a bit sharper).
Click to expand...
My sentiments exactly . I bought the 14-30 before a trip to Iceland last year and was very pleased with its performance.
No doubt the 14-24 2.8 is a better performer; that's what justifies the premium price. As one of my photography friends like to say, "There's no limit on how nice you can be to yourself."

Enjoy.
 
Member's gallery
ElenaH said:
@jhallettbc , this is exactly my case! I had F-mount 14-24 and I even took it with me to Africa many times! But it was big and heavy. Meanwhile I have two Z-cameras and sold my F-mount. And I am thinking about Z-mount 14-24 for about 1 year already. Actually, I sold F-mount becasue of it. But still cannot decide to buy Z-mount.
At the moment I use 24/1,4 Sigma and 18/2.8 Zeiss Batis ...
This year I planned some spots in Africa where I have an excellent nightscape opportunity! I used 14-24 primarely for nightscapes.
You told you are going to Australia! How good it is for nightscapes! Do you know a youtube channel "Nightscape Images" from Richard Tati? It is quite a famous channel and he is living in Australia, he is talking also about good locations. I'd recommend to have a look!
And please, please, post your images and make a review about z14-24 for nightscapes and astrophotograpohy when you are back!
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tip about the YouTube channel; I will have a look. As for how good Australia is for nightscapes, I will find out. Undoubtedly in the interior where the air is very dry the conditions would be excellent. I will be on the East Coast, for a while in a cabin by the beach. The air could be too humid for good star shots.
 
Member's gallery
I borrowed both the 14-30 and the 14-24 from NPS and purchased the 14-30. I believe the 14-30 to be better for PJ work as it is lighter and longer. It does not disappoint on sharpness either. If I planned to use this for landscape work, I would have purchased the 14-24. I am basically a sports guy, but I do other work as well. Can't take away my 400/2.8 TC! Best of luck.
 
Member's gallery
I wanted to buy one wild angle lens. Last year I borrow the Z14-24 and the z24-80 f2.8. I went to Kancagamus Highway in New Hampshire to photograph the fall Color and see which one fit my need. 90 % of my photos were taken with the Z 24-70 and the remaining with the Z 14-24. I happy really happy with the result of both lenses. So I bought the Z 24-70. In my last two trips to Hawaii and Newfounland, I found for landscape and Astro was missing the reach of 20 mm. So now I feel that I need the Z14-24 to complete my photography gear for video and still. I am happy that everyone love this lens
 
Member's gallery
jhallettbc said:
I had the old F-mount version and thought it took amazing photos but never used it much because of its weight. I originally thought I'd use it on vacation in Europe for interiors and cityscapes. However when it came time to leave, I'd decide to take my 18-35 f3.5-4.5 because it is so much lighter and smaller. I never regretted leaving the 14-24 at home was alway pleased with the 18-35. In my opinion it is a highly underrated lens. I tested it against a Nikon 16-35 and the 18-35 was better hands down.

Now having mirrorless cameras I revisited what I wanted for a wide angle lens. I borrowed a friend's Z 14-30 and thought it only took slightly better photos than the 18-35 and you really had to look to see the difference. Couldn't see spending the money on one. hen I tried out the Z 14-24 and its sharpness blew me away so I took the plunge and bought it. I've only had it since Saturday but I'm super pleased with the photos. Here's one I took in a Vancouver park today. I don't imagine the sharpness will really show up in a jpeg though. I leaving for Australia this Saturday and I know I'll have many opportunities for amazing landscape shots. I also plan to do some star photography for the first time having read how great it is for that.

View attachment 81554
Click to expand...
A great shot, and It looks like this was taken in Vancouver, BC, looking North across the Burrard inlet a few days ago. I am also contemplating which wide Nikon Z leans best meets my needs. Please keep us updated on your experience. Cheers, Doug
 
Member's gallery
Doug said:
A great shot, and It looks like this was taken in Vancouver, BC, looking North across the Burrard inlet a few days ago. I am also contemplating which wide Nikon Z leans best meets my needs. Please keep us updated on your experience. Cheers, Doug
Click to expand...
Very good!. It was taken at Jericho Park looking towards the North Shore mountains.
 
Member's gallery
jhallettbc said:
I had the old F-mount version and thought it took amazing photos but never used it much because of its weight. I originally thought I'd use it on vacation in Europe for interiors and cityscapes. However when it came time to leave, I'd decide to take my 18-35 f3.5-4.5 because it is so much lighter and smaller. I never regretted leaving the 14-24 at home was alway pleased with the 18-35. In my opinion it is a highly underrated lens. I tested it against a Nikon 16-35 and the 18-35 was better hands down.

Now having mirrorless cameras I revisited what I wanted for a wide angle lens. I borrowed a friend's Z 14-30 and thought it only took slightly better photos than the 18-35 and you really had to look to see the difference. Couldn't see spending the money on one. hen I tried out the Z 14-24 and its sharpness blew me away so I took the plunge and bought it. I've only had it since Saturday but I'm super pleased with the photos. Here's one I took in a Vancouver park today. I don't imagine the sharpness will really show up in a jpeg though. I leaving for Australia this Saturday and I know I'll have many opportunities for amazing landscape shots. I also plan to do some star photography for the first time having read how great it is for that.

View attachment 81554
Click to expand...
Looks really sharp to me. Enjoy!
 
Member's gallery
This is a late comment. I'm looking at the Z 14-30 or Z 14-24 but since I'm selling my Tamron 15-30. My option would be the Z 14-24 otherwise I would have to buy say the Z 20 F1.8 as well as the Z 14-24.
 
Member's gallery
It smaller and lighter is better for you, then get the 14-30. I personally don't find the Z14-24 too big after having owned the F 14-24. I found it so heavy and big, I hardly ever used it.
 
Member's gallery
jhallettbc said:
I had the old F-mount version and thought it took amazing photos but never used it much because of its weight. I originally thought I'd use it on vacation in Europe for interiors and cityscapes. However when it came time to leave, I'd decide to take my 18-35 f3.5-4.5 because it is so much lighter and smaller. I never regretted leaving the 14-24 at home was alway pleased with the 18-35. In my opinion it is a highly underrated lens. I tested it against a Nikon 16-35 and the 18-35 was better hands down.

Now having mirrorless cameras I revisited what I wanted for a wide angle lens. I borrowed a friend's Z 14-30 and thought it only took slightly better photos than the 18-35 and you really had to look to see the difference. Couldn't see spending the money on one. hen I tried out the Z 14-24 and its sharpness blew me away so I took the plunge and bought it. I've only had it since Saturday but I'm super pleased with the photos. Here's one I took in a Vancouver park today. I don't imagine the sharpness will really show up in a jpeg though. I leaving for Australia this Saturday and I know I'll have many opportunities for amazing landscape shots. I also plan to do some star photography for the first time having read how great it is for that.

View attachment 81554
Click to expand...
Another great shot of the North Shore Mountains.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top