Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Should I go tilt-shift or ultra-wide?


  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1
jmt382

jmt382

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Country Flag

I currently have a Nikon D7100 DX SLR, but I'm not sure how much that factors into my question.

 

I've been coveting the Nikon 14-24mm F/2.8 FX lens, even though I have a DX camera. I am waiting for Nikon to announce their new lineup on their 100th anniversary on July 25th, to determine if I want to upgrade to FX, get a new DX if it's good enough, or stay with my current camera. There are DX lenses with that focal length, but they don't open to 2.8, and the Nikon 14-24mm F2.8 is a phenomenal lens from what I've read. I want a fast lens so I can shoot some star trails, although that would not be its primary purpose. I want a phenomenal landscape lens for photographing meadows, mountains, and an occasional urbanscape. I also want an ultra-wide because there are plenty of times when I can not get further from the subject without introducing unwanted hordes of people into the picture.

 

I read that I should learn to use a tilt-shift lens if I want to take photos as good as Ansel Adams with his View camera. I don't need a tilt-shift lens for architecture photography, but I could see how the straight lines would come in handy for forest landscapes. The pictures taken from tilt-shift lenses look amazing, for their ability to have a large rock in the immediate foreground, a mountain in the far background, and a lake in the middle; and for it all to be focused and sharp as a tack. I can see how a tilt-shift lens would be so much fun to use, and I would also be interested in learning how to shoot portraits where I blur everything but the subject's faces, and potentially food photography. However, I've also read many of the benefits of a tilt-shift lens can be replicated in Photoshop.

 

That's the background, so here's the question: Is the Nikon 14-24mm F/2.8 FX lens as sharp as a Tilt-Shift lens when I want everything in focus? Can the Nikon take a picture like the mountain picture I have attached, or do pictures like these absolutely require a tilt-shift lens? I can't really afford either lens, but if I'm going to be stupid, I need to pick one or the other. Which lens will take my photos the furthest?

Attached Thumbnails

  • b6232930c54d4ac5b165eab613c1d1ca.jpg