Discussion in 'Reality Check' started by Getson, Jan 26, 2009.
Pick up the Nikon 14-24 2.8 lens?
If I get it though, can I take pictures of waterfalls better?
You can shoot the shit out of some ducks too
If nothing else, make them look either REALLY big, or REALLY small
awww. hutchy does not approve. and for once i had nothing to do with it.
it's a really great lens. you won't be disappointed.
don't go chasing waterfalls.
stick to those ducks and dogs
that you're used to?
I only kid. But seriously, I've been thinking about grabbing this one for a while now.
What are your thoughts on not being able to put a (front) filter on it? That was the deal breaker for me and I went 17-35/2.8
I figure for what I'm going to use it for and for how often I'm actually going to use it, it won't matter.
Superb lens, so yes. The sharpest wide I've ever used and extremely resistant to flare. It's one of the main reasons why I picked up a D700. This link should be entertaining (for Canon & Nikon shooters): http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/
Doesn't really bother me. Since I went digital the only filter I still bother with is a polarizer. On a lens this wide, you wouldn't get even polarization anyway no matter what you do. That said if you needed CCs or NDs, there is no gel holder in the back which surprised me.
I'm bustin into some TLC over here.
I think someone is looking for the red light special...all through the night.
If you do pick it up, make sure to put it on your rental list and then let me know. I wouldn't mind playing with it for a morning.
I would for sure.
My friend Dan just picked it up for him self if you want to try it.
That would be sweet! Oh, I just got your voicemail about 5 minutes ago too!