Any questions about the nature of these reviews? Visit my Ethics Statement. It’s all quite simple!
I purchased this lens at the following link at B&H Photo. I think the “official” nerdy lens name is: Nikon AF-S Zoom Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF Lens.
And now, onto the shockingly short review:
This is the best wide angle lens I have ever used. Whenever I am standing with a fellow photographer that has a Nikon DSLR, I immediately force them to remove whatever lens they happen to have on and put this one on so they can try it out. They are amazed too.
Here is an anecdotal collection of the things they say:
“There is hardly any distortion!”
“I can’t believe how much I can see through this thing!”
“I wish I had this when I went to [insert name of a place where there is general photography-regret].”
“Wow that is a big ass bubble on there.”
As for that last comment; it is very true! The lens is huge – much bigger than you would ever expect. It has a huge glass bubble on the end to gather all that light, so traditional lens covers don’t work. The one it comes with reminds me a little of a top to a Starbucks coffee, and it’s not so easy to fit into your pocket as you are out and about.
Pretty much every landscape I take now and in the future will use this lens. It’s much better than the Sigma 10-20mm that used to fill my nights and days. Below is a shot I took with this monster of a lens. You can click on it to zoom in (All Sizes) on the Flickr link to see how wonderful it is.
What is that “f/2.8″ about? It’s about speed. When you shoot at 2.8, you get a lot of light in very quickly. To prove how valuable this is, look at one of the shots below. I was hanging out of a helicopter shooting Chicago at sunset. There was not much light, and having a lens that shot at f2.8 saved the day.
You might notice that I have a special post-processing technique. If you would like to find out more about that, you are welcome to visit my HDR Tutorial.
If you want to find out more about other equipment, I have some SLR Camera suggestions that also discuss a few other lenses.
December 31st, 2008 02:26 | Stuck In Customs» HDR Tutorial - A Step-by-Step Guide to my Style of Photogrpahy
[...] Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 Review – A great wide-angle lens that I use for 80% of my landscapes [...]
December 31st, 2008 23:46 | john
OHHhhhh. That hurts, I like my sigma, but suppose there may be better out there.
January 21st, 2009 01:43 | David
I had heard this lens is so good that cannon users were working on creative ways to use this lens on their cameras.
Thanks for the reinforcement of this lens and also for the short to-the-point flavor of this review.
January 21st, 2009 11:45 | Gary
Unfortunately, I have a Tokina 12-24 and a Sigma 17-35 and this lens in two short weeks has shown me that it blows them away. They are for sale now.
I am now saving for it cousin the 24-70 f2.8 G lens.
February 26th, 2009 10:20 | Kellie
Wow! Its crazy to me to see these pictures you’ve taken all over the world & included are landscapes I drive by every week! I live in Brenham, Tx and have always been fascinated with the little Ghosttown nearby & my eye always goes to the Revival set up on 290 when i’m out that way. Another cool place you might want to check out is Mumford, Tx..not much too it, but there is a really cool old abandoned warehouse/building there that I think you would appreciate.
March 5th, 2009 22:09 | sam friedman
You really should go to Archer City, Texas…Home of Larry McMurtry..and home to the Mckinney Cattle Co…goes back 100 years, and this is probably the last year. Mr McKinney passed away and the bank is running it, and they cannot run a ranch..So they have it up for sale and they are closing down the cattle. This ranch is one of the few old texas ranches in original condition ie. nothing has been done to alter the landscape in 50 years..This is the last cow-calf operation of its kind in the county. The ranch is 13,500 acres. I have been trying to capture it for years but the scope is daunting. Maby you might find yourway out our way to take a photo or two…Sam Friedman cell 214-906-2026
March 5th, 2009 23:18 | Stuck In Customs
Thanks Sam – I may try that some day!
March 20th, 2009 03:46 | Dan
A friend is letting me use this exact lens on my D300. I am reading that the D700 (which he also has and offered to let me try) is even better for this lens. I am amazed at the non distortion of this lens.
I can deliberately distort people and critters by getting very close to them.
I wonder if he will forget that he is letting me use this lens?
It is an amazing piece of hardware.
April 3rd, 2009 17:09 | Galactic Cannibal
Hey Dude,
Ur HDR photo technique is most interesting. But once one has seen a forest U have seen them all. Unlike the tree forest Ur HDR photos are leaning towards the artificial, clinical, antiseptic and boring. Great for the masses of LCD’s, where image and instant gratification is their only crutch before the “what’s next image”.
No offence ment Dude.
Galactic Cannibal
April 12th, 2009 07:03 | chaise lounge
gourgeous
April 28th, 2009 20:27 | Matt
I am some what of a Newbie in photography and I have been rocking the Sigma 10-20 lens for about 3 months now, I have like the results. But as someone who has used both lenses, what are some of the things that make you favor the 14-24 over the Sigma? Thank you kindly.
May 18th, 2009 23:54 | A walk in the garden
[...] Nikon 14-24 Review [...]
May 19th, 2009 00:07 | The Place in Texas Where They Found the 17 Bodies
[...] Nikon 14-24 Review [...]
May 19th, 2009 04:47 | Ian Nelson
Love the photos with this review
Fantastic
Shame I have canon not Nikon
Also always amused when American’s refer to a place as having a long long history then state it is in the order of 100 years – well makes me chuckle [waits for the barrage of rotten tomatoes]
Great review
Ian
May 25th, 2009 19:06 | Jeff
First, I would like to thank you for all the help your flickr and blog sites have given me in the past few years… From HDR to LucisARt..
I am thinking about buying the 12-24mm over the sigma 10-20mm now.. but I have one question… some of my photog friends say it is a great lens, well worth the money… however it does have one draw back… the lens very easily scratchs.. and there is no way to attach a uv or clear filter to prevent that for this lens…Have you found that to be true ? and if so.. what care do you give the lens… Thanks again.
June 30th, 2009 08:08 | Dave Wilson
I used to love my Sigma 10-20 until I looked at the sharpness I am getting from my new Nikon lenses. There is absolutely no comparison and the Sigma’s edge softness really bothers me now. The Nikon 14-24mm is now second on my shopping list after the 24-70mm.
July 31st, 2009 14:39 | Don Faust
Wow – nice shots! I am used to the 12-24 on the Dx, but now that I have the D700, I have to get this!… the perspective is incredible.
August 17th, 2009 05:55 | Saleh AlRashaid
i Just bought this lens it is super ultra wide angle with 2.8 !! its the Widest wide angle in the world u will get amazing result with FX.. i use it with my D700 i would suggest this lens only for FX sensor
September 18th, 2009 02:56 | Ed
This is not the widest angle lens at all, the Zuiko 7-14mm for Olympus dSLRs has the widest angle in the world.
October 3rd, 2009 08:36 | dj
just got a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8.
Unbelievable!
i don’t see any problems with corners, pin cushion, etc.
Ya gotta try it.
October 3rd, 2009 17:27 | William Power
Wait a minute – the Zuiko 7-14 has to be factored to about 11.5 on the Olympus does it not. I cannot find my calculator. A mute point because we’re getting into the fisheye range here on full-frame.
October 12th, 2009 08:13 | Klarno
Ed, there are two lenses that can claim the crown as the widest rectilinear lens for a fullframe camera. Those are the Sigma 12-24, and if you factor in the Leica M9, the Voigtlander 12mm.
The Zuiko 7-14 is for a crop sensor, and gives a field of view equivalent to 14-28mm.
Now, if you’re using a DX or other APS system (with a crop factor of typically 1.5x), Canon offers a 10-22, Nikon offers a 10-24, and Sigma offers a 10-20; the Zuiko lens has a wider angle of view for its system than any of these do their theirs (and admittedly, the Zuiko costs 2-3x as much as these other ultrawides).
November 17th, 2009 23:29 | AMusingFool
I must admit, I’ve yet to hear anything but raves for this lens. Maybe I’ll be able to afford it one of these days.
November 19th, 2009 08:02 | Scott Webb
i’m set on this lens for shooting real estate and excited by it because my pictures are going to be even hotter.
side benefit being that it’s just plan amazing. I fully love wide shooting and I feel so good while doing it. looks like an investment well worth it.
November 29th, 2009 14:20 | Steven Carvotta
This is an amazing lens along with my D700….
December 4th, 2009 12:36 | BK
Hi Trey,
Mind sharing if your usage of the 14-24 ran into any problems that would traditionally needed a filter?
My biggest concern is the inability to use CPL filter to remove the reflection on surfaces. How were you able to get round this?
As for high contrast scenes, I used to use soft ND grad filter, but I understand that this can be remedied by stacking the photos, HDR etc.
Looking forward to your comment. Am planning to buy 14-24 based on your opinions as the 14-24 is your bread and butter lens!
December 4th, 2009 14:38 | Stuck In Customs
Thanks for the comments !
BK – I do not know. I don’t use any filters at all. I find that when I shoot HDR that the various exposures get me all the light I need (or don’t need!) in post
December 4th, 2009 19:04 | BK
Thanks Trey for your response.
How about when you shoot the photos with reflection on the surfaces? Like the ones with skyscrapers or lakes. Have you had any problems taking those shots?
You current answer already pushed me 50% to buy the 14-24 instead of the 17-35!
Thanks!
BK
December 26th, 2009 07:40 | Ian Downey
Having serious thoughts myself re selling my 17-35 to help finance the purchase of a 14-24 as it gets rave reviews everywhere. However, it is an interesting point that BK makes re surface reflections as you cannot use a polariser. I also shoot seascapes quite a bit pre and after sunrise/sunset and on many occasions an ND Grad is required to get the shot envisaged. HDR really is not feasible in these situations as the water movement can cause problems when it comes to lining up the shots in Photomatix unless someone knows how to get around this problem.
Would be interested to hear some views on these points as I`m sure BK would also.
Ian
December 27th, 2009 11:50 | scott webb
Wonder if you have any comparison shots – ie sigma 10-20 and compare to 14-24mm
I’d love to be able to see them. I’m battling with buying the new lens or getting a new imac one day.
January 28th, 2010 14:00 | Marc
I’ve heard great things about this lens. While I love these shots, the lens quality can not be judged by post-processed pictures. I’d really like to see the RAW pics to see what the lens itself can do.
February 8th, 2010 20:44 | Ian Downey
Re post 29 of 23th Dec. any chance of an answer. I have your book and ready to go. Would be easily persuaded to get a 14-24 after trying out my friends but am yet to be convinced re coastal shots with the 14-24 and no filtration also the lining up of waves in Photomatics. Any advice/help in this regard would indeed be appreciated.
Thanks,
Ian
February 9th, 2010 00:46 | Stuck In Customs
Thanks all!
Scott – most of my work pre-2009 was shot with the sigma 10-20 mm
Ian – Sorry mate – every day I get hundreds of comments scattered across thousands of mediums! But – lining up waves?? You mean a ghosting problems? I always advise fixing that via masking — I don’t use any filters on any of my lenses — but I think I know what you are talking about
February 17th, 2010 16:12 | Marco (Roo) Magallona
Greetings, Trey!
I felt compelled to write you a little note to thank you for your great work as it has inspired me to try new things in photography.
Recently, a friend of mine suggested that I try my hand at HDR photography after looking at some of my Panoramic work and the first book I saw and picked up at B&N just happened to be yours. I then started looking around for reviews on the Nikon 14-24 as it has come widely recommended as quite possibly THE Definitive Ultra-wideangle lens to use for Nikon’s FX format cameras and whose name should I happen to see but yours AGAIN! So, since I can’t seem to get anywhere along the lines of HDR panoramics without seeing your name, I thought it best to say Hello!
Your work is amazing and your tutorials have me looking forward to working more and more with HDR.
I made a first attempt at an HDR Panoramic, but can see now that I went about it the wrong way – (The City) http://www.facebook.com/pages/Shuteru-Photography-for-many-causes/259221536278?ref=search&sid=1502462276.39737223..1
Looking forward to applying some of your techniques soon.
Also, for the gentleman concerned about not being able to use filters with the Nikon 14-24 – Please don’t let that stop you from getting this amazing piece of glass, a little bit of creativity will solve that problem for you as some people are already creating their own custom filter holders easily and inexpensively. http://www.flickr.com/photos/13847280@N03/2655841619/
Cheers!
-Marco
February 19th, 2010 04:51 | Mark Baker
Great to follow your thoughts. Welcome to the antipodes. Australia is only next door.
Where do you think the 24 f1.4 will fit into your wish list?
March 1st, 2010 17:29 | Joe Nowak
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joe_nowak/
March 1st, 2010 17:34 | Joe Nowak
Comparing the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 to the Sigma 14 is like comparing a Lamborghini Diablo to a Hyundai Excel! I know… I have the Sigma 14 too, and the images at wide open look like garbage next to the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 set at 14mm at f/2.8! Not even in the same universe!