The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

FIGHT CLUB! 24mm f1.4G

pophoto

New member
Guy: ...but why, what does the Nikkor 24mm not live upto the Zeiss 25?

Is it that much sharper, better control of flare, rendering, all the above, or just having a Zeiss (subjective or objective), I'm asking since Nikon is asking a lot for a date?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The 24 does not have the corners and it felt like veiling look wide open. It's a nice lens but the Zeiss has more bit and better corners. Color I like the Zeiss as well. It's also smaller
 

DDudenbostel

Active member
I purchased a 25 f2, 35 f2 and 100 f2 Zeiss and returned them due to very disappointing edge and corner performance wide open. I had to stop down to f8 to get decent corners and that wasn't acceptable. Most of my work is documentary and shot under terrible to non existant light and most of my shooting is between f1.4 - f4. I didn't even bother with the Nikkor's but bought current high speed Leica glass and an M9. There's no perfect lens IMO. The nikkor glass has fantastic flare controll and the Zeiss does as well but as mentioned the Zeiss disappointed me. I guess I had expected the reflex glass to perform like my Zeiss ZM and it didn't. The Leica glass is very sharp (24 elmar, 35 summilux fle, 50 sumilux asph, 75 summilux and 90 apo asph summicron) but they lack flare controll. As long as the light is not in front of th elens you're fine but if you have a back lit subject it's terrible. Also the M9 is way behind in image quality vs the D800 or most any current Canon or Nikon. I have a D3100 for vacation shooting and like the look of the images better than the M9. The little lenses I have aren't up to Leica but the color and raw files are better IMO.

I'm not a landscape shooter as mentioned so you results and demands may be different.
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
I shot both the 21mm zf.2 vs the 24mm f1.4g against the same scene. They were close, but the Zeiss had the edge in the corners @ 100 % crops, and better micro contrast. There's more CA @1.4 with the 24mm 1.4G, but stopped down a little and the lens has stunning resolution in the center. AF does come in handy when shooting action.
 

pophoto

New member
I shot both the 21mm zf.2 vs the 24mm f1.4g against the same scene. They were close, but the Zeiss had the edge in the corners @ 100 % crops, and better micro contrast. There's more CA @1.4 with the 24mm 1.4G, but stopped down a little and the lens has stunning resolution in the center. AF does come in handy when shooting action.
How about from f/5.6, f/8 and f/11?
Do the edges improve and CA?

Thanks Po
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
Yes, there's improvement in the CA stopped down with the 24mm1.4G. Corners are slightly better too. If you were primarily shooting landscape then the ZF.2 is a good choice.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I have no particular issue with the 24/1.4G, but don't lust after one either. In my case it's more that I prefer the 20 and 28 to the 24, so never really need to reach for it. I do use the 24 PCE a lot, but often crop it slightly. Then my new favorite wide is an old crusty 17-35/2.8. I really like the versatility of that zoom range, and for whatever reason I really like the way that lens -- at least my copy of it -- draws.
 

pophoto

New member
Jack I had the older 17-35/2.8 before I sold off my D700 and Nikon gear, but I really liked the lens too, although I would have thought it lacking on the D800/E. I was thinking to give the newer 16-35/4 VRII a try!
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I have to say that my copy does not "lack" on the D800/D800E except in the extreme corners. Extreme edges remain very usable, though not as crisp as that central 2/3rds of the IC, which is exceptionally sharp.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Jack I had the older 17-35/2.8 before I sold off my D700 and Nikon gear, but I really liked the lens too, although I would have thought it lacking on the D800/E. I was thinking to give the newer 16-35/4 VRII a try!
I had a number of posts (one going in-depth) regarding the performance of the Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 on the D800e. It's actually quite good although at certain focal lengths in definitely shows some weakness in the corners. Pluses though it is a good focal length spread, relatively compact in size compared to others covering these focal lengths, resistance to flair, all with very low distortion. Stopping down to at least f5.6 really improves on areas of corner/edge weakness.

I believe Jack has or has had this lens too wit his D800/e.

Dave (D&A)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Looks good Jazz -- I especially like the way it/D800 combo handle contrast too :thumbup: I am on a mini trip with family this weekend, mounted my 17-35 on my E and that is all the gear I brought -- no bag, no extra battery, no extra cards, just a camera and lens... Having a great time with it, and love the simplicity. Just a FWIW ;)
 

Photojazz

Member
Thanks Jack, not my best work, just a couple of frames I dug up. I am considering getting a D800E down the line, I'll then see how the 24 and a few other lenses do, before I make up my mind what I keep, what I sell, as I sell down in some ways, but keep what works for me. I am particularly interested in seeing what the 45 PCE does on a D800E. Could be magical. 200VR too should be awesome.
 
Top