Nikon has just announced two new lenses – the Nikon 24mm f/1.4 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR. With the new 24mm f/1.4, Nikon has finally offered an update to fill the niche left by the discontinued Nikon 28mm f/1.4, but is it too little, too late?
What do these lenses mean for music photography?
With Nikon’s new and now-standard-for-pro-lenses Nano coating, ED glass, and all the goodness one now expects from Nikon’s new releases. I expect that the new lens should have nothing but excellent performance, if Nikon’s recent track record is any indication. The MTF charts of the new lens look promising, to say the least, especially for such a wide-aperture lens.
For live music photography, I think this lens is going to be an excellent performer, but still relegated to specialty use for my needs. Simply put, I very rarely use primes any more. More often than not, f/2.8 glass is fast enough when combined with the excellent high ISO performance of modern DSLRs. Events where this lens will excel are more “creative” lighting treatments at smaller, club-level venues. For arenas and amphitheaters, I’m going to stick to my f/2.8 glass.
More importantly, this lens signals a commitment from Nikon to developing and refining their lens offerings. After discontinuing the 28mm f/1.4 AF-D, their fastest wide prime, several years ago, Nikon has been lacking a low light beast to match Canon’s 24mm f/1.4, especially with the latter’s Mark II update in 2008. Now what I’d love to see is a 35mm f/1.4 from Nikon to match this and the recent 50mm f/1.4.
Outside of the fast-paced world of rock photography, where the limitations of a prime – even a fast prime – can be considerable, I think this lens will find a very excited market. For travel, wedding, and low-light photojournalist applications, this lens is going to be killer, with the price to match – $2199.95/€2149.00/£1949.99.
For full-frame users, things just got interesting in the 16-35mm f/4 VR. At first glance, the lens roughly fills the same gap in Nikon’s lineup as the Canon 17-40mm f/4. However, the most interesting aspect of this lens is the inclusion of Vibration Reduction, Nikon’s in-lens image stabilization.
So while the f/4 aperture looks a little sluggish for live music photography, between the VR and being a lower-priced alternative to the superlative Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8, I think this lens could be a contender. While I’m not in the market for this lens, I think this is a truly interesting option as a wide-angle zoom that should promise excellent IQ in a very nice zoom range.
Aside from live music photography, where I think this lens could really excel is as an excellent band portrait lens. The focal length is perfect for groups, and I have no doubt that, when stopped down, the image quality rendered will be excellent.
In comparison to the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8, the new 16-35mm f/4 offers a less awkward form factor, a third-less weight, and takes 77mm filters in contrast to the bulbous front end of the f/2.8 zoom. At a listed price of $1259.95/€1199.00/£1049.99, I certainly think there are enough differences between the two ultra-wide zooms to give many general buyers pause for thought.
End Notes:
Want the details? Get them here:
This entry was posted on Monday, February 8th, 2010 at 10:30 pm and is filed under Photography Gear and tagged with 24mm f/1.4, 26-35mm f/4, full frame, lenses, nano, new, nikon, release. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Welcome to ishootshows.com, your source for music photography featuring daily concert coverage, portrait features, and photo advice from professional music photographer Todd Owyoung.
Support this site by purchasing your photo equipment through my affiliate links to B&H Photo Video or Amazon.com
Learn more about how you can support the features of ishootshows.com.
Shooting Caitlin Rose and band before the Old 97s was a fantastic warm up, and a nice way to dust of…
Here’s a little preview from a recent shoot with my friends Option Control toward the end of l…
Today Adobe has released the beta version of Lightroom4, the successor to their popular image manage…
You’ve seen it before – weird, colored blobs in your photographs radiating outward from some…
About that time when I said about the megapixel war being over with the release of the Nikon D4 and …
New Nikon glass announced – 24/1.4 and 16-35/4. Their potential for music photography, as explained by @toddowyoung – http://ow.ly/1okCfX
RT @toddowyoung: Nikon announce new 24mm f/1.4 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lenses: http://ow.ly/1okCfX
RT @toddowyoung: Nikon announce new 24mm f/1.4 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lenses: http://ow.ly/1okCfX
Nice write-up – since my favorite venues are the small clubs this 24mm could become my new standard:) Can’t wait to try it out!
Hey Nicole,
Thanks for the comment. It looks like the 24mm f/1.4 is going to have a weighty price tag, but I’m sure it will be quite excellent for your needs. Definitely a club lens for sure.
RT @toddowyoung: Nikon announce new 24mm f/1.4 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lenses: http://ow.ly/1okCfX
RT @toddowyoung: Nikon announce new 24mm f/1.4 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lenses: http://ow.ly/1okCfX
RT @toddowyoung: Nikon announce new 24mm f/1.4 and Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lenses: http://ow.ly/1okCfX
HI Todd,
thanks for this.
I got a Nikon D700 body to go along my film stuff (not really for gigs but for other stuff), I was about to buy the 14-24 f2.8 when I read this news about the 16-35 f4… considering wide angles allow a slower shutter speed, have longer DOF and the VR provided (not very useful at gigs, though, sice it’s the subject movement the main issue) it may indeed be a cheaper option, I like the idea of going up to 35mm (which is my “normal” lenght) so the question is all about how cheaper? Do you know anything about prices (from which I’ll understand more about expected quality as well)?
Hey Valerio,
Glad to post some quick thoughts – I will probably add a few more thoughts in a minute after I get to these comments.
Yes, f/4 with VR would be more manageable than one might think, but it’s still f/4. I used to have the Tokina 12-24mm f/4, and almost never used it for shows – when I did, it was more of a hail mary shot made at very low shutter speeds. The wide field of view will hide some of that, but it’s not ideal. Personally, I’d recommend the 14-24mm for concert photography if you can outlay the cash. The price of the 16-35mm is listed as $1259.95/€1199.00/£1049.99.
Hi Todd,
I agree with you for gigs 14-24 is better, but I was thinking at the lens mailny outside gigs for documentary and travel photography.
After all I am down to 24mm f2.8 with the 24-70 which is wide enough to me (considering I don’t do much gig photography on digital) and with that lens I would be f4 only from 16 to 24 which is OK considering the slower shutter speed it allows (regardless the VR). I just need to see some tests on the road, used to Zeiss lenses to me quality is paramount. If it doesn’t suffer I would appreciate to buy a lighter and cheaper glass.
Thank you for the answer
New 24mm-1/4 looks interesting, but the pricetag will sure be very high.
Regarding primes vs zoom lenses in concert photography, I still have 85mm-1/4 as my favourite vs 2,8 zoom lenses range. Mainly because of its excellent sharpness and lovely bokeh. But You need enough space and fast enough legs for using that lens.
Sure it’s pretty rare, but have You used fisheye on some show shooting situations? What results did You get and what are Your comments. What fisheye lens would You recommend on full frame for shooting shows .. in terms of optical quality?
Hey Marts,
Yeah, the new 24mm f/1.4 has a price listed at $2199.95/€2149.00/£1949.99. I love what Nikon has been doing with their new lenses, but the recent price raises and the high starting prices make these tools quite expensive out of the gate.
I like my 85mm f/1.4, but I wouldn’t mind an updated version. Even on the D3, older screw driven lenses are never as precise with AF as the new SWM/AF-S lenses, especially in very low light when the fast aperture matters the most.
I’ve never shot with a fisheye on fullframe – are you looking for rectilinear or circular?
I was thinking of circular fisheye.
I’ve followed some threads and resumed that Nikkon 16mm 1/2,8, “modified” 10.5mm DX 1/2,8 or Sigma 15mm 1/2,8 most recommended on Nikon full frame.
I just thought that You might have some hands on experience with some of those lenses in concert photography situations. Sure these are pretty rare occasions but could be a lot of fun.
The other question is of course how much fun I can afford myself :-)
Initial price about 1200$, will be interesting to see what the actual street price will look like, compared to the 14-24mm.
Andreas,
True – the 14-24mm f/2.8 is an expensive chunk of glass. If the new 16-35mm creeps closer to $1000 or even cheaper, that would be a nice option for many folks.
Nikon's new 24mm f/1.4 is weighing in at a whopping $2200. http://bit.ly/cBJDwp (via @toddowyoung)
Nice! RT @toddowyoung: Just updated my thoughts on Nikon's new lenses. 24mm f/1.4 is going to be a lowlight monster. http://ow.ly/1okCfX
RT @toddowyoung my thoughts on Nikon's new lenses. 24mm f/1.4 is going to be a lowlight monster– with a price to match. http://ow.ly/1okCfX
The 24mm looks great since I do almost all my shooting in clubs, but with that price tag I’ll be sticking with my 30mm Sigma.
Laura,
Very true. For DX users, there are certainly cheaper options for a lens that will do similar things at a much more economical price. Great point.
For FX/fullframe shooters, there are fewer options for a fast-aperture, wide-angle prime.
In comparison to the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8, the new 16-35mm f/4 offers a less awkward form factor, a third-less weight, and takes 77mm filters in contrast to the bulbous front end of the f/2.8 zoom.
For those occasions the old 17-35mm was a good fit. And it has f/2.8 too. Still wonder how VR is not efficient on wide-angle one day and now suddenly you suddenly get 4 f-stops improvement. To me it seems someone at Nikon copy & pasted some marketing text.
True. The 16-35mm f/4 may well be Nikon’s “final” answer to the death of the 17-35mm f/2.8. For travel and landscape shooters, I think the 16-35mm looks like a great option indeed.
Now that Nikon is introducing pro-level f/4 lenses, I would love to see 70-200mm f/4 and ~24-120mm f/4 lenses, to0.
Just updated my thoughts on Nikon's new lenses. 24mm f/1.4 is going to be a lowlight monster – with a price to match. http://ow.ly/1okCfX
why would anyone choose this over the 17-35mm 2.8? which is an awesome bit of glass. The 24mm 1.4 is amazing but its a little steep. I will stick with the 85mm 1.4 as my main prime. it seems to do everything i need from a lens and doesn’t come of my camera much.