Wide\Ultra wide angle for D700 « Nikon Rumors Forum

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.


Nikon Rumors Forum

where there’s smoke there’s forum fire

Register or log in - lost password?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon Lenses

Wide\Ultra wide angle for D700

(64 posts) (32 voices)
  • Started 4 years ago by nau
  • Latest reply from JJump
  • Related Topics:
    1. Is the D700 a cheaper option than a D4 for Sports Photography? Not For VIDEO..
    2. What's going to happen to the D700 price?
    3. D700 buy or wait
    4. D700 issue/malfunction: yellowish bar in photos
    5. D700/D3 Viewfinder

Tags:

No tags yet.

« Previous123
  1. Ronin.1

    member
    Joined: Jan '10
    Posts: 46

    offline

    What you consider an ultra-wide lens is a bit different than what I would normally consider an ultra-wide lens. 24mm is a very, very nice focal length for a wide angle lens, but I would not consider it to be an ultra-wide and I most certainly would not consider a 28mm lens to be an ultra-wide angle lens.

    I have a 17-35mm f2.8 which I like a great deal on film and a 10-24 DX which pretty much duplicates it except for the speed. You start getting dramatic changes in perspective once you go below 24mm. If that is what you want, I would agree with sevencrossing's recommendation to get a 16-35mm f4 VR.

    One other thing, the depth of field of ultra-wide angle lenses is typically quite great, especially when stopped down and is the hallmark of their classic use. That is very, very different from the idea of shooting an f1.4 prime wide open. Neither approach is better or worse, just different. You should consider that carefully before making your selection.

    Cheers!

    Posted 2 years ago #
  2. studio460

    preferred member
    Joined: May '10
    Posts: 1,231

    offline

    On an FX body, I would consider 20mm or less an ultra-wide, and on a DX body, 14mm or less.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  3. sevencrossing

    preferred member
    Joined: Sep '10
    Posts: 1,265

    offline

    I forgot to mention, The 16-35mm f4 VR. does had a bit of distortion and vignetting but that can automatically corrected when importing with LR3

    Posted 2 years ago #
  4. Drab

    preferred member
    Joined: Aug '10
    Posts: 540

    offline

    Yea, as Ronin.1 said f/1.4 doesn't give much background blur @ 24mm. About the same amount as 50mm at f/3. If subject isolation through background defocus was one of your ideas, drop it. ;)

    I mention this because once upon a time I had bought a quite wide lens for the time (28 f/2.8 AI-s) thinking it would be great for interior use. What _I_ found was that the types of interior spaces I found myself in were busy congested places and what ended up happening was that the frame became a jumble of subjects.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  5. Gareth

    preferred member
    Joined: Sep '10
    Posts: 591

    offline

    the DOF of the 35 1.4 is pretty shallow on my d700.

    Photobucket
    testing in nikon plaza.

    Photobucket
    last friday in the snow in osaka!

    Photobucket
    20 second moonlit exposure.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  6. dyckim

    member
    Joined: Feb '11
    Posts: 18

    offline

    I also have the 16-35mm vr ii for the d700. Vignetting can be controlled. The lens is fantastic but there is a bit of distortion. Overall on a full frame, I am very satisfied. It is sharp and a great carry on lens. I always take it when I go to Times square.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  7. JY

    preferred member
    Joined: Oct '10
    Posts: 102

    offline

    Thought to just give an update.
    I saw someone was selling a 14-24 2.8 for a reasonable price in a very good condition and couldn't resist.

    I didn't like it at first as I have never shoot at such a wide angle of view. It is a pain to catch an active little girl who is running around with a wide angle lens. But slowly, I started to like this lens. It is super sharp and contrasty too.

    Last saturday, I shoot a kid's birthday in door and surprised that I could keep the minimum shutter speed at 1/200 with ISO at around 2000-4000sh with my d700. As i am getting more comfortable with these focal length, now I keep thinking the 24 1.4 maybe better for it speed, weight, able to put a filter on and still wide enough for landscape (not the main purpose but it is a bonus).

    Posted 2 years ago #
  8. NSXType-R

    preferred member
    Joined: Mar '09
    Posts: 2,803

    offline

    JY said:
    Thought to just give an update.
    I saw someone was selling a 14-24 2.8 for a reasonable price in a very good condition and couldn't resist.

    I didn't like it at first as I have never shoot at such a wide angle of view. It is a pain to catch an active little girl who is running around with a wide angle lens. But slowly, I started to like this lens. It is super sharp and contrasty too.

    Last saturday, I shoot a kid's birthday in door and surprised that I could keep the minimum shutter speed at 1/200 with ISO at around 2000-4000sh with my d700. As i am getting more comfortable with these focal length, now I keep thinking the 24 1.4 maybe better for it speed, weight, able to put a filter on and still wide enough for landscape (not the main purpose but it is a bonus).

    It's not really a sports lens, but I guess you could get interesting stuff with such a wide lens.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  9. starkcontrast

    new member
    Joined: Mar '11
    Posts: 4

    offline

    Has anyone tried the Tokina 11-16 2.8 yet?

    Posted 2 years ago #
  10. jerl

    preferred member
    Joined: Dec '10
    Posts: 425

    offline

    Lots of people have tried it out, but I don't think it would be worth using it on a D700 though. Is there any particular question you have about it though?

    Posted 2 years ago #
  11. JY

    preferred member
    Joined: Oct '10
    Posts: 102

    offline

    NSXType-R

    NSXType-R said:
    It's not really a sports lens, but I guess you could get interesting stuff with such a wide lens.

    Ofcourse it is not :) it just hard to freeze active kids' motion below 1/200 shutter speed. I am pretty happy with the result, pictures are sharp it just sometimes I forgot to change the aperture when I need to increase the DOF.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  12. casperwb

    preferred member
    Joined: Jan '11
    Posts: 558

    offline

    So as the old saying goes, spend your money on good glass, instead of bodies, the lenses will always be with you, but in three years........the bodies will be getting ready to go out to pasture.

    unless you have a manual focus F series body.

    whish someone would come up with a way to turn a F3 into digital.

    sigh.....................

    Posted 2 years ago #
  13. jerl

    preferred member
    Joined: Dec '10
    Posts: 425

    offline

    Well, there was that prototype digital F3 mentioned on the NR blog a couple of days ago that's being sold on ebay. It probably doesn't perform as well as you would want though, which shows that the real problem with camera obsolescence is not the mechanics of the body (although I'm sure that helps) but the sensor and other internals.

    I could go on and on, but I don't think that would be a good idea.

    Posted 2 years ago #
  14. JJump

    preferred member
    Joined: Oct '10
    Posts: 108

    offline

    Which wide lens does not have barrel distortion aside from the rectilinear 15mm? Is there even one? Or maybe a zoom that starts to lose the distortion at a certain focal length?

    Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

« Previous123

Reply

You must log in to post.

NikonRumors Forum (http://nikonrumors.com/forum) is proudly powered by bbPress
Disclaimer: This site has no affiliation with Nikon USA or any other subsidiary of Nikon. Please visit the official Nikon website at nikon.com
Copyright © 2008-2011 NikonRumors.com