Nikkor 14-24 or 17-35?

[tommyg]

OK, simple question ... which one would be best for on a D700?

OK.. maybe not so simple! Looking at something I can take overseas for good general wide shots.. indoors and outdoors.

Any thoughts, or other lenses that might fit the bill?

Cheers
Tom

[Bob G]

Both exceptional lenses and I have owned both. Currently have the 14-24 and it is great - however on a FF camera I can't help thinking you'd be better off with the 24-70 as 24 is still quite wide on a fullframe and you won't get the distortion that the 14-24 will give at it's widest.

Your question is pretty broadly pitched and might need to zero in a bit on your requirements for anyone to be specifically helpful.

Cheers

[aim54x]

Bob G is correct there. The 24-70 on a film or FX camera is a great range. If you want an ultrawide then the 14-24 is probably the better choice, the 17-35 is probably more of a walkaround-ultrawide though but neither will be as good as the 24-70 as a walkaround lens.

[MATT]

I' in a similar boat.

I would love the 14-24 but think for ME it would not be practical. So for wide angle I "think" I have decided on a Sigma 12-24for wide angle, and the 24-70 Nikon.

The 17-35 will come after I buy both of those and I think it would be a better option than the 14-24. The 14-24 seems to be unsurpassed but for ME the 17-35 would be more practical.


After re reading my post it appears I was of no help good luck and let us know which one you chose.

MATT

[Reschsmooth]

Because I have the 17-35, I can answer impartially. The benefits of it are the aperture ring, wider focal range and filter thread. One or both of these may be irrelevant for you. The disadvantages are that it doesn't have the newer element coatings the 14-24 has and the longer focal length at the wider end.

If I was buying from scratch, I would probably go for the 17-35 again because it suits my purposes better, and I have rarely needed to go wider than 17mm anyway.

[tommyg]

I'm swaying towards the 17-35, as it appears to be a slightly better fit as a standard wide-angle... and able to put a filter on it helps to. The 14-24 is an amazing lens, but not sure whether that extra width is really needed at this stage .. although saying that I know at some stage I will probably bite the bullet for that one as well

the 24-70 is another one on my looong list of lenses to get, followed by the 70-200.

Cheers for the comments

[kiwi]

I have the 24-70 and for a walkabout lens the 24 on full frame is really quite wide, for wider or lighter and for indoor kids snaps i bought a 20 F/2.8 which is fun to use and very small and light so can fit in your pocket.

[gstark]

The 14-24 is an amazing lens, but not sure whether that extra width is really needed at this stage

What do you shoot? What subjects? And how do you shoot them.

I would suggest that, unless you have a very good reason, you look towards the Nikkor Triumvirate as your goal: 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200. In an FX body, that makes a very complete kit which will cover most of your needs, except for when you need specialist glass like a PC lens, or a lot of reach.