Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 9 posts | 
by SMB on Tue Aug 22, 2017 1:05 pm
SMB
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1046
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
My 17-35mm lens is now 17 years old. Does a lens this old perform less well with the newest camera bodies? Any suggestions on an upgrade? I have ruled out a Nikon 14-24 as I like shooting with a Variable ND filter. I have not used any other wide angle zooms on my D4s and D810 bodies so I am not sure if I am missing out on sharper images. Is the Nikon 16-35mm 4 lens a significant upgrade? Don't know anything about third party WA zoom lenses.
Stan
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:23 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
The 17-35 lens was never a really great performer in the corners - even for film it was a bit soft with quite a bit of distortion. It is not a lens that is recommended for a D810 if you want to record any fine detail in the corners and along the edges of the frame. The 16-35 f/4 is certainly an improvement but also not a real world class performer. Nikon's zoom offerings in the wide angle regime, especially if you need filters, are a bit lacking. You said you use variable ND filters with ultra-wides? Generally that results in some weird effects due to cross polarization. Normally the go to alternative in the excellent but affordable ultra wide zoom range regime, and they are a bit better than the Nikon offerings are the Tamron 15-30 f/2.8, and the Sigma 12-24 Art but neither of those take screw in filters either. Another option would be to get a couple of primes. Nikon has a 20mm f/1.8 that is pretty decent, certainly better than the zooms in that regime. Sigma makes a very good 20mm f/1.4 Art lens. But if you want a zoom, your only real option is the Nikon 16-35 f/4.
 

by SMB on Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:38 pm
SMB
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1046
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Thanks E.J.
That is pretty much what my reading led to. I have been hoping for the last year to see a Nikon upgrade. A sure way to guarantee that Nikon will come out with a new WA zoom will be for me to buy the 16-35mm.

I use a Singh-Ray Vari-ND to "slow" water down in some landscape situations. I have a trip coming up to Iceland and I am trying to think ahead about the best WA zoom to cover landscapes and night auroras.
Stan
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Aug 22, 2017 5:32 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
There are filter kits for the 14-24 and Tamron 15-30 - those are your two best options in my opinion.  Unfortunately those filter kits are really bulky and expensive as those lenses require 150mm slide in filters.  I don't think the 16-35 f/4 is due for an update.  It is really designed as a wide angle "kit" zoom for the 24mp sensor cameras like the D610/D750 but like I said, it's a pretty big step up from the 17-35.  But for Auroara I think an f/4 lens is too slow and a f/2.8 is kind of on the edge.  You might think about renting something like the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 or Nikon 20mm f/1.8 for your trip for that.
 

by Cal on Wed Aug 23, 2017 2:26 pm
Cal
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4
Joined: 15 Oct 2012
E.J. Peiker wrote:There are filter kits for the 14-24 and Tamron 15-30 - those are your two best options in my opinion.  Unfortunately those filter kits are really bulky and expensive as those lenses require 150mm slide in filters.  I don't think the 16-35 f/4 is due for an update.  It is really designed as a wide angle "kit" zoom for the 24mp sensor cameras like the D610/D750 but like I said, it's a pretty big step up from the 17-35.  But for Auroara I think an f/4 lens is too slow and a f/2.8 is kind of on the edge.  You might think about renting something like the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 or Nikon 20mm f/1.8 for your trip for that.


Hi EJ,

Hope you don't mind me jumpibg in with a question? How does the Canon 16-35mm f4 compare with the Nikon 16-35 f4? Is it possible to form a judgment when not using the same system for testing? Not looking to start a system debate, just interested in the lenses themselves and some comments made by a friend.

Thanks 
 

by Dave Courtenay on Wed Aug 23, 2017 2:46 pm
Dave Courtenay
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1707
Joined: 6 Nov 2007
Location: North Carolina
I have had the 14-24 and 16-35, I sold the 14-24 as the range was limited and it sat around doing nothing and was very heavy, I used the 16-35 for quite a while and it was ok but ended up selling it, Last year i purchased the Nikon 18-35 for a trek in the Himalayas and have been very pleased with it, Very light, Very sharp, I rate it over the 16-35, Takes filters and around $700

Dave
http://www.wildlifeinfocus.com


A Brit-A Broad
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Aug 23, 2017 3:32 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Cal wrote:
E.J. Peiker wrote:There are filter kits for the 14-24 and Tamron 15-30 - those are your two best options in my opinion.  Unfortunately those filter kits are really bulky and expensive as those lenses require 150mm slide in filters.  I don't think the 16-35 f/4 is due for an update.  It is really designed as a wide angle "kit" zoom for the 24mp sensor cameras like the D610/D750 but like I said, it's a pretty big step up from the 17-35.  But for Auroara I think an f/4 lens is too slow and a f/2.8 is kind of on the edge.  You might think about renting something like the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 or Nikon 20mm f/1.8 for your trip for that.


Hi EJ,

Hope you don't mind me jumpibg in with a question? How does the Canon 16-35mm f4 compare with the Nikon 16-35 f4? Is it possible to form a judgment when not using the same system for testing? Not looking to start a system debate, just interested in the lenses themselves and some comments made by a friend.

Thanks 
The Canon 16-35 f/4 is significantly superior to the Nikon version.   I would have no qualms about it even on a 5DsR.

As an aside, I just put the brand new 16-35 f/2.8 G Master lens through the test suite this morning and it blows away every 16-35 ever made by a significant margin.
 

by Cal on Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:57 am
Cal
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4
Joined: 15 Oct 2012
Thanks EJ - much appreciated.
 

by SMB on Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:23 pm
SMB
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1046
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
I might consider the Tamron 15-30mm 2.8, but that runs into the filter issues again.
Stan
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
9 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group