Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question!

Let me just add that I am a little mystified on why this lens is so highly regarded. I went in with such high expectations and was prepared to be blown away and let me just say that I am not really all that impressed as far as sharpness is concerned. Heck, my 24-70 is sharper than the 14-24.

So I am genuinely confused by all this...

no, look at the remote on the left (I ran out of coasters) but not the chessboard. Oddly enough, I had a harder time focusing on the remote than I did the very low contrast brick coasters.

I did notice the sides were softer at 14 & better at 24. But again, those were at 100% crops, I don't expect them to be crisp. When I filled the frame, I thought the IQ was better.

The center point was significantly sharper at all ranges. imo.

I think I'm not as demanding though. When I'm doing environmental portraits and use a side AF point, I'm not usually at 2.8. But I've not had any issues that make me think it's not usable, even at 2.8. My uwa portraits (with that lens) sell better than just about anything I do.

So, I guess it's a matter of preference?

Permagrin wrote in post #10211368
no, look at the remote on the left (I ran out of coasters) but not the chessboard. Oddly enough, I had a harder time focusing on the remote than I did the very low contrast brick coasters.

Ah, OK. That makes sense. So the right most AF point would be over the right most brick coaster correct?

Permagrin wrote in post #10211368
I did notice the sides were softer at 14 & better at 24. But again, those were at 100% crops, I don't expect them to be crisp. When I filled the frame, I thought the IQ was better.

Yeah, believe me, I would rather just have my gear work than study 100% crops, which can get tiring really quickly. I guess I just want to make sure things are good b/c of the switch to Nikon. I want my gear to be and tip top working condition for my shoots.

Permagrin wrote in post #10211368
The center point was significantly sharper at all ranges. imo.

Totally 100% agree. I wonder if this is typical. I mean, what are the chances that we would both have questionable copies right? Especially after I had mine calibrated!

Now I am curious if you get the same results from the 24-70? Logic says yes. All my lenses get progressively "softer" as I use AF points that are further and further from the center one, but the 2 tele lenses I mentioned earlier are certainly sharp enough for me not to care. Not so with my shorter lenses and my non AF-S lenses like the 85D and Sigma 50 1.4. I am going to test my 105VR that I just got today.

Permagrin wrote in post #10211368
I think I'm not as demanding though. When I'm doing environmental portraits and use a side AF point, I'm not usually at 2.8. But I've not had any issues that make me think it's not usable, even at 2.8. My uwa portraits (with that lens) sell better than just about anything I do.

So, I guess it's a matter of preference?

I'm not obsessed with 100% crops either, although it's probably difficult to believe that from all my posts in this thread! All I am looking for is acceptably sharp lenses. The hype over this lens was so big that perhaps I was expecting too much. I'm not really all that impressed, even compared to the 16-35MKII I used to own.

I agree that perhaps testing the corners at f2.8 isn't all that realistic. Again, perhaps the result of an over-hyped lens?

I think that this lens is highly rated because of the results it gives. I don't normally post my work photos but...these are all with the 14-24.

at 14mm

Fantastic shots!

I would expect good results from this lens stopped down to f9-f13 like you did on your shots however. I was expecting the same kind of magic at f2.8 and perhaps that's just too much to expect from this lens. (?) Hence, my "over-hyped" statement since folks seem to praise this lens to no end.

I'm just thinking...what's to stop me from getting something like the Sigma 12-24 then?

Don't want to stir things up here. Just want to know what I got in my 14-24!

Well...the benefits I see with the 14-24 are:

Very minimal distortion.

I'm not sure how fast the AF is on the sigma. Ben could probably answer that better than I can, but it's quite speedy on the 14-24

Or how well the CA is controlled. It's very controlled on this lens.


The price is really the worst point about this lens. Sigma would win there. And the lack of being able to use filters....but I'm not sure if you can use them on the sigma either. Size...the 14-24 is very bulky.


and don't worry about me being stirred up. I think people should use what makes them happy. I'm definitely not in the "defined by my gear" camp. If I seem like I'm defending the 14-24 I don't mean to. I love it. But it truly suits my style.

I ran some tests outside after I got home from work and I would say at realistic working distances, it's fine.

I must say the trip to Nikon was definitely needed as things look much better compared to before shooting the same boring backyard objects.

I shot off a few at f7.1 - f11 and things look very nice at 14mm, at least on the LCD it did. I will have to confirm on my PC. But I can already tell it's much, much better now.

So perhaps this lens isn't such a great lens to be testing against boxes, texts, and such...:o

I completely agree with distortion control on this lens. It's actually rather amazing...I mean, we are talking about 14mm afterall!

Here are the test shots.

http://nicksan.zenfoli​o.com/p332829411

Oh, and BTW, as soon as I tested out the 8fps on the D700 + grip, I immediately decided I made the right choice in getting it!

Oh, and the 105VR...all I can say is stupid sharp!

nicksan wrote in post #10212969
Oh, and BTW, as soon as I tested out the 8fps on the D700 + grip, I immediately decided I made the right choice in getting it!

Oh, and the 105VR...all I can say is stupid sharp!

And certainly sharp enough even with the outer AF points.

WOW!!!!! it is indeed stupidly sharp hahaha... WOW!!! really...

Just want to comment on Sigma service, and not in a good way.

So I sent my 50 1.4 to get it calibrated about a month ago. A few days after the lens was logged into their system, they called me to ask me what body I used. IIRC, that was about 3 weeks ago.

Have not heard from them since. Nothing. So I called today to inquire and they told me that the lens shipped out today.

I guess communication isn't their strong point. Heck, I don't think there's even a way to check repair status online.

Oh well. Hopefully the lens performs up to its potential...not that it was all that bad to begin with.

Also, I have confirmed with at least another photographer that the 24-70 does indeed exhibit similar behavior as the 14-24 when using the outer AF points. This particular person sent his 24-70 to Nikon to have it checked out. He said that it's better but still not perfect. In fact he's found this was the case with multiple copies before he purchased it.

Somewhat surprised by this since I don't ever recall having this issue with Canon lenses. Not that I ever checked this closely but the only reason why I am checking now is b/c I noticed some things in regular shooting.

I think it has something to do with field curvature...dunno...

Just thought I'd poke my head in and share a few pics.

Was out at the track last weekend, doin' what I do. Turned the counter over on the D300 again (30K?) and the 70-300VR continued to function flawlessly. Its got to be close to 100K clicks on it now.

Dean Rachwitz wrote in post #10215455
Put the Tamron 17-50 2.8 on and scootched up really close to the track, flat in the dirt for a few low and wide shots before course control told me to scootch my ass back.

Brave man! Do the tires used kick up gravel on the track (and send them your way) or do they just get embedded into the tire ?

joove wrote in post #10215854
Brave man! Do the tires used kick up gravel on the track (and send them your way) or do they just get embedded into the tire ?

The track stays really clean, actually, with the exception of dust. I've never had a rock tossed at me at the track, but out on the roads when I am following someone it happens all the time.