Request for RAW image: Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 on Canon FF body

[rogerg (Roger)]

Hi all,

I’d appreciate it if someone could send me at least one RAW frame from a full frame Canon DSLR using a Nikon 14-24 F/2.8 lens. This highly regarded lens isn’t yet in my arsenal and I wouldn’t mind seeing firsthand how the edge quality compares to other lenses. The image would need to have stars to the edge in at least two corners.

I’m guessing the file will be too large to post here so PM me for email address or share me a dropbox link.

Thanks,
Roger.

[CapturingTheNight (Greg)]

Hi Roger,
I have a couple from when Colin kindly let me bolt his lens to my camera but my internet has been slowed for a few days so I won't be able to upload a file until I am back up to full speed again. Perhaps try contacting Colin or Mike Salway directly as they are two that I know of who can run that combination. From what I saw with my limited time with Colin's lens, all the hype over it's performance is well and truly justified. I could tell instantly just from the small lcd image on the back of the camera that it was so much sharper right to the edge wide open, than what is considered to be about the second best ultra wide angle, my 14mm Pro Optic (Samyang, Rokinnon, Bower, etc). If I had money to spare I would certainly buy one.
Cheers
Greg

[iceman (Mike)]

Oh yeh it's definitely great. I can send you one when I get a chance, but I can tell you it's worth it.

[gregbradley]

Probably not an issue with a Canon camera as it has much the same registration distance as a Nikon but mirrorless which have much shorter registration distances need good quality adapters.

I have this lens and when I first got my Sony A7r I had 2 adapters, one the highly regarded Metabones one.

To my horror images were shockingly bad with the last 1/4 of the image smeared and blurred and distorted. I tried the other adapter - same thing.

Then I read some more posts and was hearing that is was great on the Sony. So I got the more precise and expensive Novoflex one. Now the performance was equal to if not even slightly better than on my Nikon D800e.

This lens was designed by the Nikon team who do super high res work for computer chips hence the fabulous performance.

Greg.

[rogerg (Roger)]

Originally Posted by iceman

Oh yeh it's definitely great. I can send you one when I get a chance, but I can tell you it's worth it.

Thanks Mike, a raw would be much appreciated when you have a moment. Nothing like seeing it for ones self

[acropolite (Phil)]

Roger, if you can tolerate losing 1 stop (F4) the new Canon 16-35F4L is reputed to be razor sharp right to the edges.

[rogerg (Roger)]

Originally Posted by acropolite

Roger, if you can tolerate losing 1 stop (F4) the new Canon 16-35F4L is reputed to be razor sharp right to the edges.

Interesting. It is not applicable in this particular case because I'm thinking entirely for astro, so want the F/2.8 if I were to buy anything.

I'm largely wanting to see if it's really worth the price of a new lens when I already have 17-40 F/4 and 24-70 F/2.8 lenses.

However your suggestion could be a realistic alternative to my 17-40 F/4 L. If it really is as good as what I just saw in some quick searches of reviews, it looks pretty much flawless, which while my 17-40 is good, it is not flawless. Maybe I should switch out my 12 year old 17-40 F/4. Hmm!

Thanks, all interesting