by Drew Loker » Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:57 pm
I REALLY thought about that 16-35...mainly as an alternative to the wonderfully sharp and colorful 14-24 that ways a ton! But, I have decided to tough it out with the 14-24.
One of the reasons I was really weighing in favor of the 16-35 is that the 14-24 is frequently too wide on the FX sensor of the D700 where the 14-24 usually lives. Say like when I am in the boat navigating the sloughs. My solution has been to just use one of the other cameras. For example, in my little cooler, I will keep the D90 with the 18-105 and I will keep the 150-500 on the D3.
That gives me:
14-24
26-157 (effective FL coverage from the 18-105 x1.5 FOV Crop)
150-500
in FL coverage.
But the problem has been that the D90 just doesn't compare to the D700. So, I am always wanting about 30-35mm of coverage in ultra sharp coverage.
So, I really have been thinking it would be nice to get that 16-35 for that reason. I just can't see selling the 14-24...because in just about EVERY other case, I want the 14...and the rest of the lens is pretty much useless. Ok, well, maybe every once in a while I creep toward the other end...but it is usually because I can't get any closer to put the nose of that 14 up against something. So, other than in the boat, the 14-24 would really still be my top choice...and I can't see having both.
Now, having said all that...I do want to do a shoot out with between the 14-24 and the 16-35.