Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/11/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>> Here's the first thing I found on my search for bad info on the 14mm 2.8D >> ED.. >> >> >> >> http://lindapark.blogspot.com/2006/11/14mm-f28d-ed-af-nikkor.html >> >> >>> From Linda >> > > > Slightly more to the point: :-) > > http://www.naturfotograf.com/14nikkor_review.html > > Note that this is from an avowed Nikon fanboy. His review is however > very much in line with what I experienced. The Nikon 14/2.8 is > 'sharper' than the Canon 14 (older one) but has more distortion. The > distortion is a lot greater than that which the older 15/3.5 Nikkor > produces, but in other regards the 14 is better. > > The Sigma 14 has slightly less distortion, and the Tamron 14 has a > bit more. As noted before, the 12-24 Sigma zoom has a lot less than > any of the 14's, but is of course a lot slower and not quite as sharp > as the Nikon. After wavering a bit back and forth as to if the lens is better off with a 1.5 crop or not he gives it a 5 out of 5, excellent for use with a digital with crop and a 4, very good when used full frame. He did go out and spend a grand and a half buying the lens after the review. So he must have been fairly impressed with the lens. Shooting ferns with it is no held why not shoot something architectural so we can see building turned into moustaches? Mark William Rabiner markrabiner.com