Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Wide Angle Lenses for D800

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

New PortraitPro 12 SALE + 10% OFF code EPZROS814
kojak
kojak e2 Member 1kojak vcard United Kingdom
20 Jan 2013 - 10:21 AM

There are only two I would look at. The Nikon 14-24 f2.8 or the Nikon 16-35 f4.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
20 Jan 2013 - 10:21 AM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

User_Removed
20 Jan 2013 - 12:44 PM


Quote: There are only two I would look at. The Nikon 14-24 f2.8 or the Nikon 16-35 f4.

Yep - for reasons I have already explained, I started with the 16-35mm and then sold it to buy the 14-24mm.

DavidNikonD800
DavidNikonD800 e2 Member 143 forum postsDavidNikonD800 vcard United Kingdom
23 Jan 2013 - 7:40 PM

Hi Have a look my album gallery which I took by 17-35 F2.8 all hand held no VR on this model. cheers

Nick_w
Nick_w e2 Member 73848 forum postsNick_w vcard England99 Constructive Critique Points
23 Jan 2013 - 7:59 PM

Tbh I wouldn't be too happy with that level of sharpness, they look a little soft to me. There's also quite an ugly colour caste, is this peculiar to the lens in question, or do you see it on all images. There's also a lot of posterisation in the sky, something I would normally expect if you recovered the highlight details, but as its a lens review I'm assuming you haven't altered the image in RAW, as this would not give an inaccurate reflection in a lens review.

Last Modified By Nick_w at 23 Jan 2013 - 8:01 PM
DavidNikonD800
DavidNikonD800 e2 Member 143 forum postsDavidNikonD800 vcard United Kingdom
24 Jan 2013 - 10:15 AM

Nick_w

What is wrong with your eyes?

Sooty_1
Sooty_1 Critique Team 41197 forum posts United Kingdom198 Constructive Critique Points
24 Jan 2013 - 10:29 AM

I concur with Nick_w. most of the images are so heavily processed so its hard to tell how the lens performs, but all the yellow rail ones show colours blocking in the sky. The tonality is not smooth, so again, hard to tell how much processing has been done. I don't think there's much wrong with his eyes there

Nick

DavidNikonD800
DavidNikonD800 e2 Member 143 forum postsDavidNikonD800 vcard United Kingdom
24 Jan 2013 - 2:08 PM

Ha, its HDR did you know that ?

Nick_w
Nick_w e2 Member 73848 forum postsNick_w vcard England99 Constructive Critique Points
24 Jan 2013 - 2:24 PM


Quote: Ha, its HDR did you know that ?

For someone who is a "Proffesional" photographer I'm surprised you expect people to assess a lens with a HDR image.

If it is HDR then you should correct the EXIF information (1/100 sec at F2.8) - HDR requires the bracketing of 2 or more images to extend the dynamic range of what the camera is able to produce, please tell me as a pro your not confussing tone mapping with HDR.

Last Modified By Nick_w at 24 Jan 2013 - 2:27 PM
DavidNikonD800
DavidNikonD800 e2 Member 143 forum postsDavidNikonD800 vcard United Kingdom
24 Jan 2013 - 2:29 PM

If you are expert you should understanding as its personal tastes, perhaps its over processing but I like it as its fun images not selling or justice !!, its HDR but these images are not suitable eg for getty images, but in my opinion these images have been seen in my breezerbrowser sideshow, all images are very sharp, rich colours and test print of 30 x 24 shown very sharp, colourful and its hand held only, I may have shaken hand?
Images for selling I use lightroom 4 and neat processing. And I use tripod. A friend of mine have 16-35 VR and not happy with it. Edges always soft and colours are too much rich., said my 17-35 F2.8 is better. But I dont know anyone have problem with 17-35, let me know who have the problem? I think 16-35 VR is very good and 17-35 is very good but I dont know why people tells difference stories. I am happy with my 17-35 and I have sold images worldwide. Thank you

Nick_w
Nick_w e2 Member 73848 forum postsNick_w vcard England99 Constructive Critique Points
24 Jan 2013 - 2:56 PM

I'm no expert David, nor do I profess to be. However I still maintain when you post numerous links in the forums to your images reviewing the 17-35, the images should be unadulterated, on a tripod to allow others to assess the true quality. (The images I refer to are the first half dozen in your PF - not the tone mapped ones later on).

I do not refer to images that are edited for creative merit, as that yours and everyones perogative (and for what its worth I do edit my images from time to rime).

Last Modified By Nick_w at 24 Jan 2013 - 2:58 PM
DavidNikonD800
DavidNikonD800 e2 Member 143 forum postsDavidNikonD800 vcard United Kingdom
24 Jan 2013 - 4:09 PM

Nick, Yes I know all about HDR, you can use three brackets exposures in JPG create HDR by Photomix, tone mapped, however my images were created HDR direct from RAW by oloneo photoengine software. Have you heard? www.oloneo.com.
I have use Photomix and sometimes comes out good but results is not what I want with this software. However oloneo is best software but not all raw obtain perfect reaults, its depends on subject and exposure etc etc..... sometimes I like nature HDR called pseudo HDR, by photoshop. Oloneo is fastest HDR. I like Topaz Adjust,...........its brilliant better then photomix, oloneo, etc etc. Once on review that Topaz adjust comes top!!!
Bear the mind lots of people knows that VR are not necessary up to 85mm but worth have VR 100mm above. I have images by tripod will be upload later. Again I think my images are satisfed and happy.

keithh
keithh e2 Member 1022910 forum postskeithh vcard Wallis and Futuna31 Constructive Critique Points
24 Jan 2013 - 4:41 PM

I read it four times.......nope, still not with it.

Sooty_1
Sooty_1 Critique Team 41197 forum posts United Kingdom198 Constructive Critique Points
24 Jan 2013 - 6:47 PM

HDR? I heard that phrase before, and I'm sure the first letter stands for "horrible"....

Why would you have a lens review where you heavily process the images, as your yellow rail pictures, which are obviously intended as comparisons withe the addition of the text?

I also have read the last couple of posts a few times and I'm not sure what you're saying, but I'm glad your images are satisfied....

dandeakin
dandeakin  6200 forum posts England3 Constructive Critique Points
24 Jan 2013 - 8:36 PM

I can't work out if this is all a wind up or not.

Cagey75
Cagey75  340 forum posts Ireland
25 Jan 2013 - 10:05 AM

If you don'tmind manual focusing, and at UWA it's pretty simple really - Look at the Zeiss 21mm Distagon - wonderful lens, highly rated, will be sharper than any of the Nikons.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.