Zeiss 21mm or Nikon 14-24mm

[Jack]

The older venerable Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 actually holds up quite well on the D800/e and with a little give and take, I actually prefer it's overall use on the D800/e over the 14-24. Corners with the 17-35mm aren't perfect either on a D800/e, but improve siginificantly upon stoping down and the lens distortion levels are kept reasonably low. The zoom range is a useful one and the lens fairly compact for a wide angle f2.8 zoom.

I have found the same thing using a friends to test. The extreme edges remain poor, but the center to 85% out remain quite excellent. I want it as a travel zoom to pair with my 24-120 -- even though it isn't as good at the extreme edge, I think it makes a nice travel wide zoom.

As discussed, the Zeiss 18mm accounts quite well on the D800/e and a good sample of the 18mm is superior to the zooms mentioned above, in my opinion when all factors are taken into account. The Zeiss 21mm is a bit sharper than the 18mm but the 18mm as Mark pointed out, has somewhat less distortion. Sort of a toss up when the two are compared and depends on what they are being used for.

I would agree 100%, except I would quantify the difference in "sharpness" between the two is minimal, while the difference in wave-distortion is fairly prominent, and in fact half the reason I chose the 18 over the 21. The other half of the reason is 21 isn't always wide enough for me

 

[D&A]

Jack Wrote--->"I would quantify the difference in "sharpness" between the two is minimal, while the difference in wave-distortion is fairly prominent, and in fact half the reason I chose the 18 over the 21.<<<

I could most definitely agree with your assesment as to minimal sharpness difference between the Zeiss 21 and 18mm. Interestingly enough, I originally felt when both were used on a D700/D3, that there was noticeably more of a difference with regards to sharpness when used with those 12mp bodies as opposed to their comparison on a D800/e. For what I most often use a wide angle lens for, the wave-form type of distortion of the 21mm often got in the way. Other than that, I do love how the 21mm performs.

Jack, I too have paired the 17-35mm f2.8 with a overlaping mid range zoom and they do make a nice combination for travel.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Jack]

Jack, I too have paired the 17-35mm f2.8 with a overlaping mid range zoom and they do make a nice combination for travel.

I know we're getting way off topic, but having overlapping zoom ranges while traveling is a HUGE benefit to my kind of shooting, and is unfortunately (for them!) too often viewed as "redundant" by many photographers...

 

[GrahamWelland]

Also helps not being stuck at one end or the other with a pair of zooms.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

My kit may wind up something like this . It's actually 2 kits

Zeiss, 18,25,50 1.4, 100 macro

Second kit 24-70,85 1.4 g, 200 f2 and tele for it. All Nikon this kit more commercial work and Zeiss more landscape.

Option lenses Nikon 17t/s I'm counting on this being released, 45 PCE and 85 PCE

 

[Thorkil]

It seems like you all are tilting towards a 18 Zeiss instead of the 21.
Well I must admit I do have a week spot for going wide, allthough my wife are getting sea-sick looking at the tilted wide-picture. Its also more handy and cheaper. A used R19 is rather expensive, and then shaving and so.
Hhhhmmmm, perhaps I should borrough a 18 and give it a try, allthough it was not in that direction my going-simpel-project was ment to go. But walking round and doing fast streetshots with a 800E, even with a 18 sounds like an impossibole project because of the shallow DOF, that don't exist, but very much look like it do. Yes could be fun to se if presetting at 8 or 11 and 2m's (7ft.) distance could make it a street camera, and perhaps a 25mm later on. hhmm.
Thorkil

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Now in regards to the 21 which I had years ago on my canons. It's a very sharp lens but the distortion is hard to correct and even the 18 is not standard distortion but has some wave in it but PT lens plugin works really nice and easy with it to correct. The 21mm is not wide enough nor tight enough for me. I like the 18 and 24 focal lengths better since I like a 35 focal length. Again like any system you need to base it on some standard lens. A lot of folks this maybe a 50mm lens than the would go 21,28,50 and say 100 as this is nice gapping between lenses. Now if your a base 35mm lens shooter than no doubt you go 24 and 85 on either side but a 21 is too close so the next best in gapping is a 17/18 lens.

I'm a base 35mm shooter so for me my gapping is perfect 18,25,35,85. Now I do have that overlap 501.8 lens too in the mix. The 50 is nice to have but I prefer 35mm as that standard focal length.

Now this gapping method has been around forever and as a prime shooter makes great sense. Now we have zooms and obviously that will create some overlap which lets say having two 35mm focal lengths is okay but having 24 and 35 maybe redundant. So again you have to watch yourself unless you are making kits for very specific shooting. This is something I am working on so I may run into some redundancy as well. I'm just not the biggest zoom fan and try to avoid them. Unless I will use it for specific type shooting for example PR , grip and grin stuff a 24-70 is a sweetie. I jumped slightly off topic but part of my point here as well is you need to decide are you a zoom guy or a prime guy. They don't mix very well at a bar. LOL

I know the 14-24 seems like your getting 4 focal lengths and you are but your also gaining weight , size and harder handling too. There are trade offs

 

[Jack]

Here's an example of a shot I could not have gotten with the 21, simply no room behind me to back up without getting run over in a busy street. ZF 18.2 hand-held at f8. (The building is called the "Turning Torso" building in Malmo, Sweden.) :

Unfortunately, I doubt the 17-35 would have fared better because the extreme edges are pretty unusable and this image extends into that lens' bad areas at both ends, but this lens holds it together pretty darn well. I like Joe's reminder about crop-ability with 36MP; even if we have to shoot a little loose, cropping to a 21 FOV is still leaving us like 28MP:

And a center crop for comparison, but not really enough fine detail to see how sharp it actually is, but at least you get an idea:

Note: After reviewing several ZF18 shots from my recent trip, I will be keeping it and probably not bother on the 17-35 zoom as I do have the 24-120 as well, and find it quite acceptable from 24 up

 

[GrahamWelland]

.

While I own and love the Zeiss 21mm, you guys have me lusting for the Zeiss 18mm. Damn you! :ROTFL:

joe,

Don't listen, just get the 15mm :grin:

 

[Jack]

joe,

Don't listen, just get the 15mm :grin:

:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

Seriously, the 15 is STELLAR, very sharp and simpler "mostly barrel" distortion to deal with. However it is easily 2x the volumetric size and most of that is in the front lens group, and then has to be close to 2x the weight of the 18. As good as it is, I know I'd never be carrying it when I needed it. By contrast the 18 tucks into a corner compartment really easily.

 

[Thorkil]

Guy: On my M6 the 21 Elmarit was allways on, the 50 and the 90 summicron's didn't touch the camera.
On the D3 most pictures with the 14-24mm were at 14mm. But I also grew a little tired of this ultra-wide. My hasselblads, I used the SWC allmost all the time(around 20-21mm I guess) and some few times the 201F with the 50mm(what a stellar view through the PM51 viewer!), allmost never the 110mm.
So I guess I ought to be a 21mm shooter, but these days a 18mm might be the headline instead, a then later on a 25mm or a 28mm. But being an architect 18mm would be the most used at work. and 25mm perhaps for street etc. (if I'm not going simple and sell all the DSLR's and buy me a M9 or just the PD1M and GRD and...............).
Jack, just a little correction , its called "turning torso"(and we look at it walking at the coastline here in Copenhagen). If you just had made a hint I could have provided you with adresses on old and interesting café's in the old town of Copenhagen also some wierd ones, where the 18mm would have been doing very well. Next time you'll have to ask . A lot of wonderfull places in innner Copenhagen, but I only seldom go there, and thats a shame.
That picture is just splendid!, and I couldn't ask for more sharpnes-wise! And clean and well-defined at the edges too!
Does the lens-correction in C1, after analysing, do the distortion-correction?
Best
Thorkil

 

[D&A]

Jack Wrote >>>"Note: After reviewing several ZF18 shots from my recent trip, I will be keeping it and probably not bother on the 17-35 zoom as I do have the 24-120 as well, and find it quite acceptable from 24 up>>>

No doubt the Zeiss 18mm is head and shoulders above the Nikon 17-35 f2.8 when set at 18mm, especially towards the corners...even if the zoom is well stopped down. With that said, where the zoom does well is in a compact travel kit when it's paried with a relatively small telezoom such as the Tamron 70-300 VC lens which is amazingly good on the D800 and far superior to Nikon's own version. A small 50mm G lens can be thrown into the mix if desired. This gives an relatively light weight 17-300mm kit that perfoms well save for that relatively small amount of corner deterioration between 17-22mm with the 17-35mm zoom.

Jack, really nice image of the turning torso building and one of a number of favorites of mine that you've posted from your recent/current trip.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Jack]

Thorkil, thank you! And next time I will for sure tag you ahead of time and get some tips. This trip came up quickly and I was not even sure I'd have a lot of free time to shoot.

Dave, thank you too!

Oh, and name has been corrected -- thanks

 

[Paul2660]

Jack,

With the 18mm, did you have any harsh flare issues? There have been some reports of flaring on the 18mm that is very hard to remove, mainly due to the shape and size of the flare.

Thanks
Paul

 

[mark1958]

I have seen flare on occasion with this lens but nothing like what i have seen with the 14-24mm. I think flare is inherent in such ultra wide angle lenses.

Jack,

With the 18mm, did you have any harsh flare issues? There have been some reports of flaring on the 18mm that is very hard to remove, mainly due to the shape and size of the flare.

Thanks
Paul

 

[Thorkil]

Could one ask all for more 18mm Zeiss pictures ?
Thorkil

 

[Jack]

Jack,

With the 18mm, did you have any harsh flare issues? There have been some reports of flaring on the 18mm that is very hard to remove, mainly due to the shape and size of the flare.

Thanks
Paul

Hi Paul,

No, I have not seen any excessive flare -- in fact, shooting into bright light, I have not really even seen any notable ghosting. I have not shot it directly into the Sun, but the Sun behind a cloud is in fact being reflected by windows in the building shot above and it's handling that perfectly...

 

[gurtch]

Could one ask all for more 18mm Zeiss pictures ?
Thorkil

Here are two taken with the Zeiss ZF.2, hand held, about f10 on a D800E.
Regards to all
Dave in NJ

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Geez Dave every time I see your images it brings me back to my youth and the New Jersey coast. I was a Seaside Heights and Beach Haven teenager during the whole summer breaks We had a house in Ortley beach but we sold it when I was about 14 so I was more about girls than photography back than. LOL

Yes " under the board walk " was my theme song. ROTFLMAO

 

[gurtch]

Geez Dave every time I see your images it brings me back to my youth and the New Jersey coast. I was a Seaside Heights and Beach Haven teenager during the whole summer breaks We had a house in Ortley beach but we sold it when I was about 14 so I was more about girls than photography back than. LOL

Yes " under the board walk " was my theme song. ROTFLMAO

Thanks Guy. We in fact live in Beach Haven year round. Truly a paradise (especially off-season). If on the east coast in our area, please look me up---will give you the grand tour to really bring back memories.
Dave