Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 + Canon V3 adapter

This is not going to be a thorough technical discussion on my part. I just wanted to say I'm very impressed with this lens and offer some quick info.

I had to replace my Canon 16-35 f/2.8 II lens earlier this summer due to an accident involving a cliff and waterfall and having already tried the 16-35 I and 17-40 f/4 lenses by Canon, as well as Tamron's 17-35 f/4 I knew finding a wide angle lens naturally designed to fit a Canon mount that was comparatively sharp to my 24-105 (this is actually a great lens at very specific aperture) at f/9 or my 70-200 at f/8 was hopeless.

I have to go ultra-light almost all the time due to the nature of my travels and have to use zooms. I had already heard great things about Nikon's 14-24 and new 16-35 and wanted to put them to the test so I ordered a V3 adapter from 16-9.net and, despite the company's claims that they have fixed their problems with shortages and have reliable production through Novaflex, it took them more than 5 WEEKS to get my adapter to me.

Upon initial testing I quickly realized it was worth the wait (just be prepared for it and don't expect them to stay in contact with you). Over a week later, I've programmed the adapter to record the EXIF data I like, such as the aperture when shooting and could program the new auto-focus chip too if I'd like.

I have realized one thing about this lens above all else so far - it puts Canon and everyone else making wide zoom lenses out there absolutely to shame. I can't believe I didn't make this switch a couple years ago when these first came out. The detail resolved even in the f/18 and f/20 range is as decent as anything that came out of my 16-35II at any aperture (bring on those 40MP sensors!) Even my 70-200 at f/8 doesn't top it for detail and it's nowhere close across the whole aperture range. Sure, you have to get used to using the lever to adjust aperture and you can't easily filter it (you can put filters on the equally impressive 16-35 Nikon though) but it doesn't take more than a moment to get the hang of it and I still have a Canon 17-40 which is very light and compact in the event I do need a solid ND or polarizer for my shot. Additionally, Lee Filters has announced a new 'BF' holder that will supposedly adapt new 150mm filters for the lens. I think Cokin has some sort of system in the works too but feel free to correct me on this.

Anyway, what a great lens.

Good Morning, you could solve the problems with adapter by using a Nikon D3 and I think you would be really amazed at the quality of the pictures. Conrad

Conrad, it would have to be a D3X because the D3 doesn't cut it for the resolution I need as a pro landscape photographer. And yes, were I starting out today and didn't have a bunch of other Canon glass I would start with Nikon. But you know, Canon absolutely dominated the digital market for nearly 10 years and I know the second I make a switch to Nikon, Canon will probably announce another new product that interests me even more. It's a back and forth right now, so I'm sticking with the best both systems have to offer and seeing where it goes.

Thanks for this great review, Marc. You mention trying out the Nikon 16-35 . . . have you been able to give that a go yet? I've been intrigued by the 14-24 and adapter for some time, but the 16-35 seems a lot more practical because of the 77mm thread and its range. Anyway, just thought I'd ask.

Phil, I have not personally tested the 16-35 but I have friends who have, I've read the raving reviews and I've seen it in action a few times - I would love one. I would really like to carry both right now but it's just too much weight for my style (you're not going to find heavier wide zooms). And, as I mentioned, filtration options are now coming along for the 14-24 and availability should be increasing. I also have seen numerous hand-made variations of holders and such so it's not going to be impossible.
Also, in my opinion, there is a pretty significant difference between 14mm and 16mm. Not that 16 isn't pretty darn wide, but 14 is one seriously WIDE lens! It's a really cool toy to have combined with that zoom length. I actually tried out the Canon 14mm f/2.8 I at one point because I wanted one badly enough. When I saw how badly it performed, however, I decided against carrying it.

Thanks for the response, Marc. This is all quite interesting and helpful.

Marc, thanks for sharing your views on the 14-24. Glad to hear that it's working well for you.

2 years ago, I came very close to buying the 14-24 lens with the (then) first version of that adapter when the pair came up for sale one day at FM. I decided against it, at the last minute, mainly because of the filter issue. I always found the 17-40 to be just ok so I was looking for something with a different look and better corner performance at the wide end.

I ultimately went with the Contax N 17-35 as converted by Conurus. It has a similar size and weight to the Nikon and not quite as sharp (still better than just about any other WA zoom) but I fell for the 3D Zeiss look and the better-ish ability to use filters. The 95mm thread wasn't very convenient because Lee didn't have a wide-angle adapter ring that size. I ended up getting a custom slip-on holder that worked fairly well.

It seems you're diggin' the ability to go to 14mm. For my own use, I think 17mm or even 21mm is wide enough but if there is one place where I would really enjoy composing that wide, it would be at the coast (where I have yet to make it in my photographic life - maybe soon ...).

Best.

What exactly does the contax/canon "conversion" entail? Similar adapter? What functionality are you loosing with the Contax lens?

Zeiss does have a way with handling contrasts really well in their glass giving images that out-of-camera "3D" look. I'm glad that's working for you. As for me, you know what a sucker I am for wide angles. So such thing as too wide IMO

Marc,

It's a full mount conversion from Contax N to Canon EF and the lens functions just like a Canon including auto-focus and electronic aperture control. The work is done by Bo Ming out of Vancouver BC and his website is www.conurus.com. (I have no affiliation with this site.) His work is highly praised but the wait time, for those sending in an unconverted lens, can be several months and the conversion cost isn't cheap.

Regretfully, I had to sell the lens after a year for financial reasons but I would choose it again if looking for a WA zoom to use on Canon. I'm way behind in posting images made with it (or posting in general, for which I feel apologetic) but I hope to resume in the near future.

Geez, I wish there was someone doing full conversions like that from Nikon's G to Canon EF. It would really be worth the wait and expense for me, but at least I've got something.

Marc-
I like wide, too. Do you have an opinion on the Sigma 12-24?

I've seen them in action several times, Buck, but I've never personally tested it. It's not a 2.8 which is a deal breaker for me because I do a fair amount of night photography with wides. The 4.5 wide-open aperture is unusual but necessary to keep it from weighing a ton and costing $2K. Build quality doesn't look or feel as solid as the Nikon but it certainly doesn't look or feel like a Canon 10-22 either...I can't really judge this for certain though obviously. I'm pretty sure it's the widest thing out there for 35mm, so that's neat. The distortion isn't as bad as I would have thought either, which helps. Color aberration is often a problem with super-wides and it doesn't seem too bad with the 12-24. That's about all I know about it. I do like it.

Marc, weren't you shooting the Canon 14mm prime at one point? Does that hold its own being a prime, or does the Nikon 14-24mm still win?

"Prime" honestly doesn't mean all that much in today's wide angle market. The 14-24 is easily, far and away better than the Canon 14mm. I'd say it's as close to flawless as a lens can be, prime or zoom.

I'm a bit late to the party here, but I'm wondering how difficult it is to set a specific aperture? I understand it only lists for 2.8/8/22, and the rest is guesswork. Thoughts?

Kurt, it's easy as can be. Just slide the lever. Unless you really, really have to know that you're at f/10 and not f/11 (and I can't see why you would) it presents no issues.

Hey Marc,

Good to see you on here again!

I just received an email today from Lee indicating that the SW150 filter adapter for that lens is now shipping. Are you getting one, and if so, do you know where to source one in the U.S.? My Google searches are turning up little to nothing. It would be killer to put NDs in front of that lens though...

Arka C.