Last year while deciding whether to purchase a Nikon D700 full frame (FX) SLR-D camera one of the biggest negatives weighted was I didn’t have lens to do a FX camera justice and I couldn’t afford purchasing professional lens at the same time as the camera.
I finally decided to purchased the D700 along with a medium price Tamron 28-300mm XR Di VC zoom lens to fill in my full frame lens gap. I also resolved better Nikon glass would be my long term goal.
The Tamron 28-300mm is a decent journeyman lens and it’s handy to have that amount of zoom range available for walkabouts.
However, it’s a little soft at the lower/upper ends and auto-focus is slow, especially when shooting near its 300mm limit or in low light conditions. There’s also a bit of zoom creep…ok, a lot of zoom creep. You learn to keep your hand on the zoom ring if you’re not shooting perfectly level. One of my biggest complaints is that at 28mm it doesn’t fulfill my wants/needs for an ultra-wide lens.
Side note: I believe the D700, or perhaps any full frame camera, places a heavier dependancy/burden on the quality of lens, especially near the edges. I’ve noticed lens defects with the D700 I’ve never seen using the same lens with a DX system.
So with collected pennies, months of meager revenue from ads/links on this blog, selling older lens and a nice Christmas contribution to my lens fund from my lovely wife, I purchased a Nikon AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF lens.
Yep, doing my part to revive the global economy.
Here’s my first impressions after a couple of weeks and several hundred shots:
Pros –
- Sharpest lens I’ve every used, sharper then my Nikon 50mm f/1.8.
- Built like a tank.
- Very quick and sharp auto-focus. Also very quiet.
- Ultra Wide but not a fisheye…14mm on a D700 is simply amazing.
- Consistent Output…from 14mm to 24mm.
Cons –
- Heavy…you’ll know you have this lens on but I’ll gladly carry it.
- Can’t accommodate filters. Not a big issue for me.
- Convex front lens element could be prone to scratching. Lens cap fits over the outside of the lens and is large. The cap may also be prone to coming off in a bag.
Overall –
An amazing lens with fantastic speed and clarity. All of the cons are minor when you consider the performance of this lens. It’s without doubt the finest lens I’ve ever owned. This is a keeper!
I’m having to learn new techniques for getting decent photos with an ultra-wide lens on a full-frame camera. I quickly discovered that a slight tilt downward from a standing position will result in getting your feet in the bottom of the shot. ;-)
If interested, you’ll find a number of the photographs posted in the last couple weeks were taken with this lens.
OK, Earl! Stop the madness!!! Didn’t you see my post the other day about how I congratulated myself on not buying a D700? Now, you swing the bait right in front of my face again! It’s not fair! It’s not fair! :-)
I got to look at that lens about a year ago and it is one sweet lens. I didn’t get to use it, but got to hold it, look through it, and imagine. Oh well …
@Paul: Yea, it made me feel kinda bad when you did that post, knowing I’d just made this purchase…notice I didn’t comment on that one. :-(
I really seesawed for a while on this. It’s a lot of money for a lens but it’ll hold it’s value if I take care of it and the D700 begs for a good lens. After shooting with it I’d agree with what one reviewer wrote: “The pain of the price vanishes once you look at the shots you get.”
Madness! I thought I was being very methodical about this…step-by-step. Looking back the madness was in was in buying DX lens. ;-)
@Earl: How much do you use your D300 now that you have the ‘700? I’m curious. Periodically, I think about how I shoot and am constantly trying to reduce the amount of gear that I have.
I know that if I had a ‘700, I’d probably not use the D300 much, if at all. I’m really a one camera kind of guy. Regarding sports, which I shoot in the fall because of Tony, standing on the baseline with a 35mm lens, or 50mm equiv. is just fine.
@Earl: I don’t know what I pressed submit, I wasn’t finished. :-) Anyway, in going back over my shots, I see that most of what I have shot recently has been somewhere in the 18-100 mm range, or 27-150mm equivalent, since I’m using a D300. If I were to have a D700, I’d probably have something like a 20mm, 50, 80-200, and that’s about it. Maybe a 135mm, which was my favorite lens back in the day before digital.
So, I’m curious about how you use your D700 and if you still use the D300. Thanks!
@Paul: In the very beginning I used the D300 a good bit but now I’m only using it when I know I can’t get very close to a subject, such as wildlife shots.
I’ve thought about selling it but there’s still occasions when it serves a purpose. That purpose, however, grows smaller as I improve my lens kit for the D700. There may be a point his year when I decide to sell it.
@Paul: To your second comment part; the Tamron 28-300mm VC lens I purchased when I got the D700 covers the range of most of my shooting (and also what you mention) and was a good investment to get me over to the D700 and full frame. It isn’t the sharpest lens at certain lengths but it’s not a bad lens for the money and it does have a decent vibration compensation. For full frame I also have 20mm, 50mm and 105mm/macro primes to go along with my 80-200mm f2.8 and then the 200-500mm.
I’ll continue to use the Tamron for a general purpose lens, switch to my other lens for special projects and very slowly invest in more professional glass for the future. At least that’s my plan. ;-)
@Paul: Follow-on thoughts: After shooting with some of my primes and then getting this Nikon 14-24mm ultra wide I’ve come to accept what others have been saying, “a good lens make the huge difference.”
I always wondered about Nikon’s decision process in deciding not to make it filter compatible for such an amazing lens. Did they think that everyone is digital now and not using filters? Most notably I would miss the ability to use a polarizer.
Nonetheless, I am sure you will have plenty fun with it!
@Mark: I also wondered about Nikon not designing for filters with this lens. But, I don’t know if there would of been compromises to the lens design to make filters possible. I guess they had their reasons? Thanks for the comment!
This lens really sings on the D700 doesn’t it? Takes some learning how to use if you’re a die hard telephoto junkie though!
@ElizaB: You’ve got that right….it does sing on the D700. It’s an amazing lens and I believe the time learning how to use its abilities will be well worth it. Thanks for your comment!
No filter threads? WTF? Who *doesn’t* want to stick a UV filter on to protect the front element of a $1700+ lens?
I’ve been waffling between a 50D or 5DmkII vs D700 as my plunge into DSLR shooting. Sure various body features appeal on the D700 (though I find it uncomfortable to hold and operate) but idiocy and a 50% premium on their sparse lens lineup keep sending me back to Canon glass.
@Anthony: I find the Canon menus and controls very awkward since I’m use to shooting with Nikons…it’s all what you get use to. The Canon models you’re considering are fine cameras in their own right.
I agree the no filter on the Nikon 14-24mm lens is at the very least inconvenient, however, this lens is the finest ultra-wide angle lens I’ve every shot with. The results make the price much easier to live with–the difference between a so-so photo and a “wow” photo.