Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="stmv" data-source="post: 427817" data-attributes="member: 10038">I have had a 14-24 for a few years now,, simply fantastic, and it is sharp at 14,, never really notice the softness at 17,  but bump to 5.6, it will be sharp there to. this lens produces quality sharp images I hardly ever sharpen when this lens is on my 800.Now, on filters,, I try not to put them on,,  polarizers once in a while, and what I find interesting is that this lens behaves a lot like my 15 mm 3.5.  bothare rectilinear, and I think the coating is different on these huge chunks of glass. I have always loved the look of the 15 mm 3.5, and I notice the 14-24 produces also the same warm shots. I can swap lens to lens and get different temps/color. My complaint on the 14x24 is that the newer lens are not as rugged.. DO NOT DROP, even on soft ground, you will be sending back to Nikon and the standard repair rate is ..... 600 dollars. A friend of mine with the same lens also dropped his a few weeks ago, and same 600 dollar bill. anyhow, I would never get rid of my 14x24, it is a keeper, 100% keeper. expensive, yes, but,, the lens seems to warrant the value. and no,, I don't chase the trinity,  for midrange I use the lowly 24-85 3.5 afs ED lens,  and for the tele zoom, I love the 80-400 OLD version, or the 80-200 2.8 zoom (a tank,, and talk about sharp). anyhow, lens are personal, but, don't get all hung up in sites testing and testing. frankly, they are tools, that need to be matched for the right composition. or occasion. anyhow, best wishes for your decisions.or by the way,, glass is tough, I never stress that much about the front surfaces. laughs, I have right intoa lightpole with my 15 mm (ok it was dark),  barely left a mark, I sure an the heck don't cover my expensive glass with some ND filter in fear of scratching.</blockquote>

Verification