Reviews and Problems with Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S NIKKOR
Showing 1-8 of 8
double vision issues, superb contrast & saturation, excellent build quality
29 February 2012
Excerpt: The contrast & saturation is superb. There's a sort of "double vision" effect for out of focus things which is a little annoying. It doesn't perform as well on subjects at infinity as I would like but for what it is it's quite good. It's a zooming, wide angle retrofocus lens and considering the constraints of modern engineering this is as good as it gets.
Excerpt: Yes, it's wide. Yes, it's fast. Yes, the glass is great. But I hope you like flares on your images. This lens just grabs any flare possible even with a DX format camera. It's a pretty heavy lens and you can't use filters. Hmmm.
Pros: Fast / accurate auto-focus, Strong Construction
Excerpt: My example of this lens provides very good center sharpness but losing sharpness noticably in the corners across a wide range of stops. It is not appreciably sharper than other lenses I've used that cover a similar angle e.g. Sigma 10-20mm on a DX-sensor camera (this lens is being used with a D700), and is noticably less sharp than my older Nikon 28-70/2.8 which is really excellent for sharpness. That said, sharpness is adequate for my purposes though not stellar.
Excerpt: I am a very experienced amateur. I bought this lens to use with a D700 as the primary lens. I was hoping for great things and had been told great things by dealers. When I got the lens it felt cheap and it was not tight at all. From the very first use it feels and is lose. For the price of this lens it should be much better build quality and feel. The pictures are no better than much less expensive lenses. No, it's not me. I used the other lenses on the same D700.
Excerpt: I bought this lens but sold it after testing it. First off, judging from the sample I received, and after side by side testing, I discovered it to be NOT AS SHARP AS my 1990's Vintage Nikon 20-35 F2.8 This was the main reason I got rid of it. It simply was not optically sharp enough to justify it's other downsides (see below). I know the hype says this lens is the sharpest of the sharp, but this is NOT what I found by any stretch of the imagination.
Pros: Low distortion
Cons: Big for walkaround lens, Heavy, Scratches Easily
Excerpt: This is a good lens, but I don't think is worth the price. This thing weights a ton when you add your camera body + other lenses to your bag It feels like you carrying rocks. Listen up, Nikon things are suppose to get smaller NOT BIGGER. For someone who can't afford this lens I would recommend the Sigma 10-20mm is an amazing lens for around $400.
Summary: I initially thought my 14-24mm simply wasn't very sharp but I soon realised it was a slight back-focusing problem. I was offered a replacement but I replaced it instead with a 14mm prime which I'm very happy with.Looking at the other comments here, I'm sure my experience wasn't typical so I'm still willing to recommend it if you get a good copy.
Wird dem Ruf nicht ganz gerecht - Update 12.10.2014
28 April 2014
Summary: Das Objektiv habe ich bei AMAZON gekauft und mit einer D800 verwendet. Leider zeigten sich Probleme an der D800 mit der Fokussierung. Daher ging die Kamera zwei Mal in den Service und wurde anschließend im Rahmen einer Kulanz des Herstellers ausgetauscht. Zeitgleich kaufte ich eine D610, die weniger Probleme mit der Fokussierung haben soll.