Sort:  

I use the Rokinon 14 f/2.8 in that department. ;) It's pretty good - I have nothing to compare it to, but I've heard that it's better than the Nikon 14-24 in how it handles coma. Given that its so cheap it's a great lens to have around, even for daytime stuff. Manual focus isn't a big problem. Most night photographers seem to have this lens, though some prefer making panos with the 24 or 35 instead.

Sigma just came out with a 14mm f/1.8. It's way more expensive but if it's in your budget may be worth a look. I don't know how it compares.

Awesome, thanks for the info. I definitely won't be getting the Sigma, not worth it in comparison, in my opinion. I was looking pretty hard at the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 w/VC though. That looks intriguing. It's just as sharp as the nikon, more useable zoom range, best VC in the biz. Will probably wind up with that one, though it's a bit more expensive

Can't speak for the Tamron - I would search specifically for how it performs with the stars (some otherwise very good lenses have what they call "coma" that distorts stars when wide or nearly wide open).

Obviously if night isn't your primary concern, it doesn't matter. :)

I wish I didn't use filters so much - those bulbous lenses would be too much trouble and added expense for me.

I had all three, the Tamron, the Rokinon/Samyang and the Nikon 14-24. Overall the Nikon was the best so I kept it and I am very happy with it. But it also depends on the sample you get. Especially the Rokinon/Samyang lenses are known for its wide sample variation.

Oh, interesting! Even for stars the 14-24 was better?

At 2.8 the Nikon was sharper at the edges than the Tamron. I think it was about equal to the Samyang.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.12
JST 0.028
BTC 64136.76
ETH 3522.23
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.57