Nikkor Wide Angle Lens Refreshes

kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,291Member
I wonder if Nikon has any plans to refresh the 2007 14-24mm and 2009 16-35mm wide angle lenses any time in the near future? Or are the spending all their R&D on the 14-30mm Z mount and other Z lineup lenses now? It would be great to have a brand new wide angle F mount to keep up with the resolution that the recent Nikon bodies produce in the last 3 years. I know it is getting dated a bit now, but has anybody been shooting the 16-35mm F4 on a D810 or D850?

Comments

  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,056Member
    I bet all future wide angles will be Z mount. It gives advantages due to short flange and wide throat.

    I’m not usually one to recommend 3p lenses, but the Sigma ART 14-24 is supposed to be very good. I got one cheap when B&H had a one day sale last week. Haven’t used it yet.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,027Moderator
    Nah mate, it is rubbish. Send it over here.... :D
    Always learning.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,056Member
    edited November 2018

    Nah mate, it is rubbish. Send it over here.... :D

    Which one? :)
    Post edited by mhedges on
  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,291Member
    mhedges you are probably right the next wide will likely be the highly anticipated 14-30 Z and a lot of secret R&D sauce will go into it. Their dslr market isn’t dead yet so fingers crossed for something there as well hopefully. The Sigma doesn't take filters easily like the Nikon 14-24 right? I have grown tired using the Lee SW-150 system on it. I really wish you could use filters easier on 14mm lenses...
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,056Member
    No it doesn't take filters.

    Just curious - what filters do you typically use on an ultrawide?
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,925Member
    mhedges said:

    No it doesn't take filters.

    Just curious - what filters do you typically use on an ultrawide?

    ND Filters.
  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,291Member

    mhedges said:

    No it doesn't take filters.

    Just curious - what filters do you typically use on an ultrawide?

    ND Filters.
    Absolutely! Graduated, reverse and big stoppers like 90% of the time I use the lens. Basically anytime the 14-24 is used outside. I find the SW-150 cumbersome and clumsy to use and its been at least 8 years as part of my kit now. I have even used a 150x150 polarizer on the 14-24, but quickly sold it because the colors and banding were unacceptable for obvious wide angle reasons. I could live with a 14mm not taking filters if we could simply hand hold a filter in front of the element that would be great, but alas the gigantic bulb prevents this from ever happening I would think. I hope design innovations abound with the Z 14-30mm lens. One can always dream!
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,027Moderator
    mhedges said:

    Nah mate, it is rubbish. Send it over here.... :D

    Which one? :)
    The 14-24 please...
    Always learning.
  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,291Member

    mhedges said:

    Nah mate, it is rubbish. Send it over here.... :D

    Which one? :)
    The 14-24 please...
    2020 the 2.8 14-24 is on the way. Emphasis on the F4 glass for the Z system seems to be the priority right now through 2019. No problem the adaptor works well apparently:)
  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,291Member
    I wonder how heavy the 2.8 Z glass will be? One thing I love is how the 24-70 F4 and 35 lenses are exactly the same size in the hand and nearly the same weight. When I mounted the 24-70 VR onto the Z7 it still feels pretty good for weight as well. I can't weight to see some Z wide angle lenses start to ship. 2019 and 2020 will be exciting times! :)
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,056Member
    Well I have been using the Sigma ART 14-24 for just a bit, and my view on it is it's a good performing and very well made lens that I can't wait to replace with the F4 Z lens as soon as I can. Its just so big and heavy, and I don't really have much need for F2.8 in an ultrawide. Honestly it makes me a little nervous to use it in my tripod because it makes the combo on Z6 very front heavy, even with the tripod on the FTZ.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 613Member
    mhedges said:

    I bet all future wide angles will be Z mount. It gives advantages due to short flange and wide throat. ....

    Compact, full frame, wide angle lenses? Absolutely! I really wish they would bulk up the roadmap with a fisheye as well.

    I'm using the FTZ with my 14-24 and with my Fisheye zoom, but I would really prefer the native Z mount. Nikon makes a lot of excellent wide angle lenses, but they can do even better with the Z mount.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • kanuckkanuck Posts: 1,291Member
    edited December 2018
    I think the Z 2.8 zoom glass will only be slightly lighter but smaller in size compared to the current F mount glass. The F4 14-30 should be sharp and light and many of us should be shooting with it frequently by this time next year if not in the first quarter of 2019. Exciting times o:)
    Post edited by kanuck on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,963Member
    Smaller, doubt it, Sony’s F2.8 glass is as big or bigger than F-mount F2.8 Nikkors. Then take the price of the F-mount and double it. If you the F-mount version just use the adaptor and save your money.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • JetrangerJetranger Posts: 7Member
    Can't imagine getting better quality than my amazingly sharp 14-24...
    D810, D300, 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8VR, 300/2.8VR, 105VR Micro, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 28-300VR, TC-14II, TC-17II, TC-20III
    http://Mundy.ca

  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,056Member
    I believe in general the Sigma ART 14-24 is sharper than the Nikon. The nikon is starting to show its age, IMO.
  • moreorlessmoreorless Posts: 120Member
    edited May 8
    My guess is that if we see a new F-mount UWA for Nikon it might actually be a 16-35mm F/2.8 lens(maybe with VR as well). I mean you mention the ages of the other lenses but the 17-35mm F/2.8 is from last millennium, granted its a good performer for its age but arguably in more need of an update given how strong Canon's similar lens is.
    Post edited by moreorless on
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 1,056Member
    Ha I didn’t even realize Nikon made a 17-35 2.8. I’m not sure how much of a market a new version would have - I think a lot of folks who want 2.8 also want 14mm on the wide end
  • moreorlessmoreorless Posts: 120Member
    mhedges said:

    Ha I didn’t even realize Nikon made a 17-35 2.8. I’m not sure how much of a market a new version would have - I think a lot of folks who want 2.8 also want 14mm on the wide end

    That does push towards a multiple lens setup though were as 16-35mm can be more of a one lens option or mixed with say a 50mm prime or indeed a lens for someone who wanst significant overlap.

    I mean Canon have released three 16-35mm F/2.8 lenses since Nikon released the 17-35mm F/3.8 so their must be some market in it?

    Again Nikon did have the advantage that their old 17-35mm F/2.8 was a very good performer, arguably better than the first two Canon 16-35mm F/2.8's lenses but the latest one clearly has them beaten so I wouldn't be surprised to see a response.
Sign In or Register to comment.