JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:materials, assembly, lightness (as light as 14 mm ...)
Cons:super ghost, not very high AT species
Opinion:Mechanically the 14th is really well done, nothing to argue, and the materials are top notch. Pretty light, slightly bulky, optically superior to the old 15mm that went to replace. It remains the big problem of the ghost, which, though to a lesser extent, compared to the 15, still persists in an unacceptable manner. Sharpness is decent, but it does not make any jumps, but the lens definitely goes diaphragmatic. The disgrace of 14 was certainly the output of 14-24, ubi maior minor cessat, any comparison between the two is really unlikely. An excellent second-hand specimen is now between 700 and 800 euros and that's worth it, but that's what we say is that an excellent 16-35 is home to that figure that goes infinitely better and also has the VR. Voting 7, and only for the profusion of noble materials ... NOTICE: The writer is not an influencer or a guru, nor does one who downloads other images from the network to impute themselves to improbable comparisons. I'm just about quarrelsomeFor a ninete passionate about photography and photographic material, and my opinion is not a gospel, but only the result of empirical experience. The objects I write really buy them, I play a few months and if I do not like them, but always and in any case of material at the moment in my possession. I do not make the copy paste of reviews taken here and there on the net, if I'm talking about an item it's just and because I had in the house the time it took (at least months) to try to figure it out. I often go against current, but this does not take my sleep, as far as possible I try to help young aspiring photographers who give a weight to their savings. But, I repeat, I do not bring the verb ...
Pros:sharpness in the center, even at full aperture
Cons:ghosting
Opinion:Nikon has made a choice. And it was this, the choice: in the case of 14 mm, does not answer the countermove of Canon. In the sense that: there was a second version for this angle, as it did for his Canon. Result? The Canon 14mm f2.8 is particularly attractive, the same focal length and aperture Nikon, less. This happened because in the meantime Nikon preferred churning 14 24 2.8. That is a lens very successful, as in sharpness. But beware: the minimum focal distorts too. Which means: the minimum focal, after adjustment, no longer a 14mm, and is no longer so clear. The 14mm f, 28 fixed - the lens here reviewed - distorts less than quoted zoom, but not less than the competitor Canon. And also suffers from ghosting against the light that was not enough, I think, highlighted. For this reason I sold it, the Nikon 14mm f2.8. From Nikonist which are now, between this and the Nikon 14 24, I would choose ... the Zeiss 15mm F3.5.
Pros:Wide angle field of FF that allows pictures to high-impact ... even on APS-C makes the dignity becoming a good 21mm. Focusing even at a distance of 15cm from the subject.
Cons:Heavy. There is the lens cover of plastic, but a pocket of skin. A max aperture is blurry, heavy vignetting and price very high.
Opinion:I could try this lens for about two months, and I must say that I found particularly well. It 'wonderful to use on FF, but also on APS-C makes dignity. A maximum aperture is blurry at the edges and also at the center, closing at F6 then you lose this defect. You should be particularly careful of the spherical lens, and it is very uncomfortable to use the lens cover since it is a simple leather pouch, so you should always use two hands to insert it. Would not recommend for the price, with a bit more you buy a 14-24 which is much better in everything.
Pros:Lightweight, wide viewing angle of FF, low flare, very light.
Cons:Unclear at maximum aperture, a stop loss, vignetting
Opinion:I replaced my old 18mm AFD, wonderful to use on FF, provides photos of high-impact, particularly on objects in the foreground, very sharp from f6 up to maximum opening is not very clear both in the center than at the edges, defect that is lost to the focal more 'closed. Low flare, after several tests, on that side, and the best of 18AFD Nikkor 20-35 AFD. You lose at least one stop of light, perhaps for the particular type of treatment of the front lens, (at first glance one might say polarized) and last thing ... cartoon in extreme shooting conditions .. but being a 14, it is also justifiable. Not the advisor to the exorbitant price even at the level of the more 'recent 14-24.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
