fbpixel

Moderators: Greg Downing, E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC - 5 hours

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 9 posts | 
by John Labrenz on Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:11 am
User avatar
John Labrenz
Moderator
Posts: 15702
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Location: Canada
Member #:01304
https://www.dpreview.com/news/9890600161/nikon-14-24mm-f2-8-s-and-50mm-f1-2-s-for-z-mount-unveiled
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Wed Sep 16, 2020 10:17 am
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4673
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
I imagine the 14-24 will be in high demand, and knowing Nikon's ability to supply products, it'll be in short supply.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:07 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 85129
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Scott Fairbairn wrote:
I imagine the 14-24 will be in high demand, and knowing Nikon's ability to supply products, it'll be in short supply.

Personally, I would much prefer their 14-30 f/4 as it takes filters.  As far as astro is concerned, I personally think f/2.8 is too slow and tend to opt for f/1.4 to f/2 lenses so the 14-28/2.8 has no appeal there either, just like the Sony 12-24 f/2.8 has no appeal to me.  Again, just personal preferences based on what I do.

Just saw that the 14-24 does take filters - 112mm :o  Not a lot of those on the market!
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:12 pm
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4673
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Scott Fairbairn wrote:
I imagine the 14-24 will be in high demand, and knowing Nikon's ability to supply products, it'll be in short supply.

Personally, I would much prefer their 14-30 f/4 as it takes filters.  As far as astro is concerned, I personally think f/2.8 is too slow and tend to opt for f/1.4 to f/2 lenses so the 14-28/2.8 has no appeal there either, just like the Sony 12-24 f/2.8 has no appeal to me.  Again, just personal preferences based on what I do.

Just saw that the 14-24 does take filters - 112mm :o  Not a lot of those on the market!




I picked up the Sigma 14mm f1.8. Man is that a monster of a lens. Have you used the Sony 20mm f1.8 for night images? It's getting good reviews.
 

by Markus Jais on Thu Sep 17, 2020 5:50 am
User avatar
Markus Jais
Lifetime Member
Posts: 2888
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Germany, near Munich
Member #:01791
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Scott Fairbairn wrote:
I imagine the 14-24 will be in high demand, and knowing Nikon's ability to supply products, it'll be in short supply.

Personally, I would much prefer their 14-30 f/4 as it takes filters.  As far as astro is concerned, I personally think f/2.8 is too slow and tend to opt for f/1.4 to f/2 lenses so the 14-28/2.8 has no appeal there either, just like the Sony 12-24 f/2.8 has no appeal to me.  Again, just personal preferences based on what I do.

Just saw that the 14-24 does take filters - 112mm :o  Not a lot of those on the market!



I found at least one polarizer quickly. But you're right, it would be easier to by a smaller one :-)

That said, I assume there will be polarizers on offers for this lens in the not too distant future.

If it actually works with a good polarizers and is as sharp as the S 2.8/24-70 then this might become a very successful lens, also because of the reduced weight. I am pretty sure that this lens will be optically stunning. Of course we will only know once we have solid tests.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Sep 17, 2020 11:27 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 85129
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Scott Fairbairn wrote:
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Scott Fairbairn wrote:
I imagine the 14-24 will be in high demand, and knowing Nikon's ability to supply products, it'll be in short supply.

Personally, I would much prefer their 14-30 f/4 as it takes filters.  As far as astro is concerned, I personally think f/2.8 is too slow and tend to opt for f/1.4 to f/2 lenses so the 14-28/2.8 has no appeal there either, just like the Sony 12-24 f/2.8 has no appeal to me.  Again, just personal preferences based on what I do.

Just saw that the 14-24 does take filters - 112mm :o  Not a lot of those on the market!




I picked up the Sigma 14mm f1.8. Man is that a monster of a lens. Have you used the Sony 20mm f1.8 for night images? It's getting good reviews.


Actually a lot of astro guys don't seem to like the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 due to pretty heavy astigmatism.
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Thu Sep 17, 2020 11:54 am
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4673
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Scott Fairbairn wrote:
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Scott Fairbairn wrote:
I imagine the 14-24 will be in high demand, and knowing Nikon's ability to supply products, it'll be in short supply.

Personally, I would much prefer their 14-30 f/4 as it takes filters.  As far as astro is concerned, I personally think f/2.8 is too slow and tend to opt for f/1.4 to f/2 lenses so the 14-28/2.8 has no appeal there either, just like the Sony 12-24 f/2.8 has no appeal to me.  Again, just personal preferences based on what I do.

Just saw that the 14-24 does take filters - 112mm :o  Not a lot of those on the market!




I picked up the Sigma 14mm f1.8. Man is that a monster of a lens. Have you used the Sony 20mm f1.8 for night images? It's getting good reviews.


Actually a lot of astro guys don't seem to like the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 due to pretty heavy astigmatism.


I was wondering about the SONY 20mm f 1.8 not the sigma. 
 

by flip2350 on Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:14 pm
flip2350
Forum Contributor
Posts: 43
Joined: 15 Mar 2013
I was also wondering about the Sony 20mm 1.8 for Astro photography.
Thanks
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Sep 17, 2020 6:04 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 85129
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
This guy seems to think it's very good - the Sony 20mm f/1.8...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb3KNZ-Tx4k&ab_channel=AlynWallace
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
9 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group