Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising

WA image quality comparison

MotoMannequin

Livermore, CA, US
8582 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

"RE: WA image quality comparison"

MotoMannequin Awarded for his extraordinary skills in landscape and wildlife photography Registered since 11th Jan 2006
Sun 09-Sep-12 04:47 PM

>I'm afraid you have just identified the one weakness of DX.
>There just aren't any really wide, fast primes.

This is very true and a great point. I'll add that, even in FX, part of the reason a zoom lens like the 14-24 can earn a reputation for being better than primes, is because the primes it's competing against just aren't that good.

...and the 14-24 really is that good. I'd certainly recommend this over the 20mm prime, if f/2.8 is really a requirement, but it will cost a bit more.

For my purposes, I don't much feel the Need for Speed in this focal length range.

Larry - a Bay Area Nikonian
My Nikonians gallery

www.tempered-light.com

A topic tagged as having a question WA image quality comparison [View all] , JohnPlev , Sat 08-Sep-12 09:56 PM
Subject
ID
Reply message RE: WA image quality comparison
1
Reply message RE: WA image quality comparison
2
     Reply message RE: WA image quality comparison
3
          Reply message RE: WA image quality comparison
4
               Reply message RE: WA image quality comparison
5
                    Reply message RE: WA image quality comparison
6
                         Reply message RE: WA image quality comparison
7