14mmLmk2 v Noink 14-24 f2.8 ED

A test that suggests the 14mm mk2 ain't no where near the new Noink zoom... so should we all rush out and buy one ( with adaptor of course?)???

I already did.

I Simonius wrote in post #4974176
A test that suggests the 14mm mk2 ain't no where near the new Noink zoom... so should we all rush out and buy one ( with adaptor of course?)???

I always recommend a second opinion. I've seen that test before, and I've seen images from the 14L - it appears to me that he had a pretty sad copy of the Canon lens. That 14-24 does look very good, though!

His tests are usually pretty good, though I would caution that he does sell an adaptor that allows the use of that new Nikon lens on a Canon body.

gasrocks wrote in post #4974259
I already did.

excellent!
Experiences - samples - reasons, please?

Tom W wrote in post #4974271
I always recommend a second opinion. I've seen that test before, and I've seen images from the 14L - it appears to me that he had a pretty sad copy of the Canon lens. That 14-24 does look very good, though!

His tests are usually pretty good, though I would caution that he does sell an adaptor that allows the use of that new Nikon lens on a Canon body.

exactly so he's hardly unbiased is he - I wouldn't accuse but those 14mm Canon resultsa looked more like tehe mk1 than the mk2, as the MK 2 is supposed to be better than that...not convinced but not sayingit aint so either

Taken from here apparently this of the 1DsMk3 - v - Nikon box brownie, both with the new 14-24 zoom on ?

yowzer!

so no one else bought the 14mmLmk2 then?

The 14mm in this case is like bringing a knife to a gun fight...

I've seen this test before - there's got to be more to the story. There's certainly very little info on the new Mark II out there. Even the Mark I is a rare bird. At the prices charged for those two - it's little wonder.

And for those that do not trust the test results at 16-9 (which I think is silly) look at Photozone.de

Nikon lens looks a heck of a lot better...

...until they're both stopped right down. I'd wager landscapes would look better from the prime. This sort of competition is good though, without Nikon our Canon stuff would be a lot pricier and perhaps not as good.

gasrocks wrote in post #5308708
And for those that do not trust the test results at 16-9 (which I think is silly) look at Photozone.de

Unfortunately photozone.de doesn't have either 14mm reviewed.

The Noink is better,. but man is it BIG.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #5309005
The Noink is better,. but man is it BIG.

it's a real stonker isn't it? But is it really that much better? can it be?really?

Has no one apart from LM bought this lens?

I thought thee'd be a flourish, but no

(Bit like the 1Ds3 - no one seems to have got one, or if they have theyr'e keeping queit about oit but that's a new thread)

I Simonius wrote in post #5309411
it's a real stonker isn't it? But is it really that much better? can it be?really?

Has no one apart from LM bought this lens?

I thought thee'd be a flourish, but no

(Bit like the 1Ds3 - no one seems to have got one, or if they have theyr'e keeping queit about oit but that's a new thread)

I ordered one a few days back....but something got messed up in the shipping and I had to cancel it. I'm gonna get one from CPS to try out in a month or so.

scotteisenphotography wrote in post #5309501
I ordered one a few days back....but something got messed up in the shipping and I had to cancel it. I'm gonna get one from CPS to try out in a month or so.

give us the low down when you get the chance?