Difference of star trails is because that stars are moving at different speeds depending on how close they are to the pole. If those are star trails, it's not the problem of the lens.
Thanks a lot Y H. Yes you are right . .and others have suggested the same thing. It's something I've not noticed so much before and I assume this is partly because of the sharpness of this new lens. Appreciate your insights.
@@nightscapeimages.richard it had me also thinking. The problem was always showing up in the left corner of the picture, ob both the horizontal shot and the vertical shot... It wasn't the same corner of the lens or of the sensor, so it had to be something else. :D
To me there is clear softness in one corner on top of the additional movement in the stars. I have a Tamron lens that shows a similar effect, no matter what direction I point the lens. Sample variation on these 14-24 is ridiculous, suggest it is decentered
Hi Richard, Just a thought on the star trails on the left side of the image. Because of the wide-angle, if the right side was more toward the south the stars would be moving slower than the stars to the north on the left side of the image. I may be way off, but one idea on why you see trails.
I think this is dead on. You can especially tell because when he starts pointing it out again at around the 10 minute mark the camera is in portrait orientation, there for the"good" top right corner of the lens from the landscape orientation of the image is now the top left corner.
You beat me to it John. In one shot with trailing, Orion is to the left of the Large Magellanic Cloud, which would support your theory that the right hand corner of the image is closer to the south celestial pole. Might (probably?) explains the trailing, unless Richard was using a tracker.
Thanks a lot for your comments John. Yes I've responded to a lot of others who suggest the same thing and I think you're right. I did notice on a few shots that the left side seemed a little softer than the right side but overall .. this is a very sharp lens and I think it's easy to see any variation in focus technique. I really appreciate you watching.
Cheers Richard, I bought this lens and love it. I did sell a kidney, but it’s OK she has another one, the wife that is.. I’m using the lens now and getting some great results. Would love an updated tutorial on nightscape pano and your workflow for stitching etc.
Haha, good on you Michael. I hope the wife is feeling better ..!!! Yes it's extremely sharp and I can see how good it would be for landscape or architectural photography as well. I have done some videos on panos. See here: ruclips.net/video/a35gttmohBw/видео.html
Interesting lens! Like others have said, the main reason for more obvious trailing on one side of the image vs the other is distance from the pole. Your shutter speeds exaggerated the issue because you'll always get slight trailing at 20sec & 14mm unless using a very low res sensor. It was a little better with the 15s sample. For perspective, I get trailing at 14mm even with 8 secs on my A7Riv at 61MP! Did you centre focus or corner focus? Most of these 12-24 and 14-24 zooms are best when focused off-centre to account for field curvature; focusing on the centre will lead to worse average sharpness across the frame. Clear skies!
If it is indeed a lens problem, then it shows up mainly in the horizontal images. Once you put it in vertical orientation, the top left becomes the bottom left and you don't have stars there and distortions are much more difficult to detect in grass or other ground features. Just a thought.
Hi Richard, I have seen similar issues in the top left corner of wide angle lenses. I put this down to the large field of view going more to the east than the rest of the image as that are of the sky moves much faster and may not be an issue totally with the lens, Taking images at 10 seconds or less would help clarify that. Regards
Richard, you are going to luv the 15mm lens you have on order. My wife uses one on her z7 15mm f2.0. It takes fantastic photos of the night sky. As you said all manual but once you get it focused does a great job.😀
Thanks for the video and review mate. Have a word with Nikon and try and get your hands on the new 50mm. Would love to see the picture quality wide open at f/1.2 for astro.
Interesting, but the only way to accurately star test a lens is to place the camera on a star tracker to eliminate any star trailing which will vary with distance from the celestial pole, as others have pointed out and mimic aberrations. And then it’s best to take in as much sky as possible so there are stars in all corners. Even the tilt of the camera with a heavy lens can cause the lens to shift or sag, perhaps shifting the focal plane or perhaps the lens elements. If the lens is permanently decentered then the aberrations will stay in the same place relative to the frame regardless of camera orientation. If the top left was soft in landscape orientation then that corner becomes the top right in portrait if the camera is turned clockwise. If the same corner appears soft no matter what orientation the camera is in then it could be a physical sagging of the lens on the mount. Shooting a tracked shot straight up would be telling! Thanks! I enjoy your videos from Oz.
Thanks a lot Alan, really appreciate your insights. Yes I think you and the others may well be correct about the slight extra star trailing caused by the extra movement further away from the celestial pole. As I mentioned in the video I only had one opportunity to shoot with the lens and it was a bit rushed. It's a very good lens overall but at least here in Australia quite expensive.
Thank you so much for posting your wonderful videos, I’ve picked up some really useful knowledge I’d never have got from reading through heaps of articles. It’s always helpful to see someone actually doing something, rather than showing the finished photo, with no idea how they got there! If at all possible (and I’m sorry if I’ve missed something that covered this) but I’d love a video that covers what I could expect from gear I actually own (or can afford!) photography is an expensive hobby, and it’s possible to spend a small fortune on equipment, but I’m trying to get the best results from old, secondhand, budget gear that I’ve had to save for ages to buy! I’d be interested to know what to expect from budget equipment, and how much of your obvious talent is down to skill and technique, and if it’s possible to get good results from old and inexpensive equipment please! Keep up the great work!! It’s very inspiring!
Thanks very much for your encouraging comments Andrew. I did a video a while back about using standard equipment. See here: ruclips.net/video/1GynWrNxts0/видео.html
@@nightscapeimages.richard thank you for this! I figured you’d have done something for us noobs, but couldn’t find it!! I’ll give it a whirl, and see what I can pick up!! Thank you for the prompt reply! Stay safe sir!! ;)
Yes I've had the Laowa for a couple of years now. Nowhere near as good as the Nikon lens. In fact I rarely use it these days . .stars in the corners are elongated .. so I typically keep it for time lapses. I've just tested the new Nikon 17-28 f2.8 and I'll have a video out tomorrow about that lens.
@@nightscapeimages.richard cheers, thanks Richard. I just watched your take on the 17-28mm (great stuff) and thanks for the feedback on the Laowa. The 17-28 looks good. So far I've generally shot with my Tamron 15-30 on D750 and been quite happy with the results. I had a play with some longer focal lengths on the weekend and loved the framing but, especially with my Nikon 50mm F, they have significant coma on the edges (birds with their wings wrapped right over their heads). I now realise how lucky I was with the 15-30mm Tamron and that I need to look into the performance of future lenses before waving the credit card around. Love your work and really enjoy your videos and thanks for the feedback.
nice clip again thanks Richard. The funny thing is that the top right and top left image sharpness doesn’t really change when you shift from landscape to portrait orientation.
Thanks for another great review Richard. I shoot with Canon 5D MkIV and recently purchased a Sigma 14mm-24mm, f 2.8. Very happy with the sharp results and was about ½ cost of Canon 16mm-35mm with less than stellar reviews for coma. Looking forward to hearing about your review on the 15mm Laowa.
G'day Richard. Good revue with great images to back up your words. I was stunned though when you said $3500!! Way out of my league. Thanks mate, stay safe.
I wonder if there was a minor variance in the inner lens alignment. With so many internal parts, a slight mis-alignment could be the issue. Especially on a rental or press review lens that's been run hard and put away wet more than a few times (ever driven a clean running, no issue rental car?). One thing I did discover was how much the curving at the bottom (fence lines, rail tracks) and inward slanting trees were a distraction for me. I really didn't realize how much that effect was for a wide angle. I have seen other reviews of the lens, but they were landscapes with focus points quite a distance from the camera. Your review is the first one showing how distorted it can be. Looking forward to your review of the Loawa 15 mm lens. Thanks for the awesome review! Here's to a you and yours having an excellent new year.
Thanks a lot MAC. Yes you are possibly quite right about the lens being a rental/lend review item. Some of my images were panoramas which will exaggerate the curved perspective. Really appreciate your comments.
Very interesting review. Even before you said it, my thought was " not at that price". I have the S 14-30 f4, a great little lens, also light and sharp. The f4 is not such a problem as the sensor is so good, one can push the iso and also do stacking. Like you, my goto lens is the 20mm f1.8 - really good. In hindsight it might have been interesting to try focusing on a spot in the top left and then top right, to see if there were differences, also may be to swing camera around so the stars in top right are then in top left. In my experiance, all the S lenses are very sharp, they are all better than any of the old F lenses ( though these were also good ). Loved the pics, in particular the single tree pano and the haybail.
Thanks as always David. Yes you are right, I should have shot in a different direction . .and even just straight up with only stars in the frame. Never mind, then lens is safely back at Nikon HQ ... appreciate your comments.
Thanks for the review Richard, I liked the critique not because I was considering the lens but just what to look out for. I think I have mentioned before that I have been using the Laowa 7.5mm f/2 (15mm full frame equivalent) since the summer. Being totally manual on my micro 4/3 Lumix GX8 presents no problem at night or in the daytime.As it is a prime there's no chance of moving the focal length accidentally either. It is incredibly sharp, small compared to that Nikon beast you have reviewed (weighs just 170g) it's also rectilinear so minimal distortion for such a wide angle. Yep, completely happy with it, hope you find the same and look forward to your review.
Hi Richard, It appears from your "review" that one doesn't always get better images with massively more expensive lenses. Thanks for sharing your experiences. JohnV
Thanks for watching John. You are correct. There is a sweet spot in there somewhere between cost and performance. This lens is very good but the cost is a bit high for casual use.
Hi, Richard. Any chance you could bung this lens on your star tracker? And/Or do a brick-wall test? That might be a conclusive test for L vs R sharpness (and add more content to your channel!!)
Spot on review Richard and I think this is the most unbiased and honest review I’ve seen on this lens. I’m with you. The price just can’t be justified for what you’re getting. Basically the same price as a camera alone. As a landscaper I’d prefer the cheaper 14-30mm F4 S lens as I never venture below F8. You could buy 2 good primes (like what you have) for the price of that 14-24mm S lens. Thanks so much for the video mate, cheers 🍻 👍🙏
Thanks so much for that Adrian. To be honest I only really had one good outing with the lens . .and it is extremely sharp. But of course the price is still very high for us here in Oz.
Hi Richard. I know that you are using Nikon for you astrophotography and since I have great respect of your work i thought I could ask your opinion on something that has to do with a lens choice for astrophotography. I am about to order my Nikon z6 II + ftz adapter and I want to ask you if I could use the AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 D lens as an alternative to the Nikkor Z 20mm f/1.8 S which is almost double the money? Thank you anyway, and that's ok if you don't know this lens.
Hi George, sorry for my late response. I've been away at a photography workshop. I wouldn't recommend the older Nikon 20mm f2.8D lens. A friend of mine has one and it has lots of coma in the corners. I'd look at the newer model "F" mount lens if you want to get something cheaper than the 20mm Z mount. The 20mm f1.8G . .then you can use your FTZ. It's not as good as the Z native lens but pretty good all round . .especially at f2.8. Hope that's helpful.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Hey Richard, thank you so much for your help. This definitely helps me avoiding buy gear that would disappoint me. I will try to see if i can get my hands on this f1.8G lens.
Hi Richard, Happy New Year! Laowa 15m f/2 is a great little lens. I bit of vignetting, but no coma and is sharp! Looking forward to your experience and video about it👍🏼 But I think you will enjoy it😊 And yeah, I think as some pointed out about the 14-24S, the corner trailing could be because of the position in regards to the pole, as the lens is so wide, or could be a bad variation of the lens .
Thanks a lot Altair. It is a loan lens that I had so it may have had some rough handling. I agree that it may also be a result of the proximity to the pole.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Hi Richard, I think it might've been a bad copy of 14-24S I've seen few other videos on RUclips and no left corner issues. It would be great of Nikon could lend you 14-24S again for a bit longer, so you could do a proper comparison to Laowa 15 f2 & Z 20 1.8S 😊 Not sure how possible it is🤣 Anyways, have a great day & hope your cuppa is hot👍🏼
Hi Richard nice vid as usual. I have the Sigma version for my 6D and sometimes get the same thing happen I put it down to rotation, when checking the spot star function in PhotoPills it recommends 9.8seconds.
Hi, I take it that you only shot with the lens in the vertical position and then created your panorama shots. I wonder if the sharpness issue is with thatt lens only. Did you report your results to the Nikon people who gave you the lens to shoot with? I love your images and the way to stack your photos to create beautiful photographs, really very special. You really do a very detailed lens review. I appreciate all your details and knowledge. You are a very unique photographer. Thank you very much for your review of the "expensive" wide angle zoon lens. No doubt it is expensive due to the high cost of manufacturing and the limited lenses available. Thank you again. 📸 ⭐️ 🌟 💫 🌟
Thanks very much for watching Joel, also for the kind words of encouragement. I did shoot quite a lot of images in the horizontal plane as well. The lens is very good overall.
Hello Richard .... Great review .. I do appreciate the integrity in which you appraised the lens and the basis for your conclsions. Perhaps a comparison to the F mount equivalent lens would have been helpful too. Stay sate Regards Rob
Thanks a lot Robbey. Yes all very good comments. It would have taken me an eternity to shoot both lenses that night as I was out for so long as it was. The new Z lens is certainly sharper and much lighter weight than the old F mount, although that lens is very good also.
Richard, looking forward to your review on the Laowa. Have been thinking about this lens myself but haven’t found many reviews that solely focus on astrophotography. From the comments below, sounds like people are happy with it.
i know you didn't think about it in the field, but take a 2 second exposure at 12,800 ISO and then look at the corners. I bet all corner stars look pinpoint and sharp. But yeah...for the most part, i buy 14-X lenses for the 14mm end. I really wish Nikon would make a 14 or 15mm F/1.8 or F/2 Z prime lens.
Thanks for this review ! Focusing on infinity with the 14-24/2.8 seems to be more tricky than the 20/1.8. Don’t you use the focus infinity startup feature this time ?
Totally with you on the lens cost and weight front Richard. Similarly for Sony, the Sony 12-24mm GM lens is extremely good for astro, however at $5300AUD I will never know. I make do with an Adapted Canon EF mount version of the Tamron 15-30mm F/2.8 G1 which I got used for a fraction of that price.
Thanks for the review! I'm not sure differences in star rotation account for everything there. The last example looked softer in the left corner without a noticable difference in trailing. Maybe a decentered lens? Looking forward to the Laowa review!
Thanks once again... off to look for snowy owls tomorrow so this lense definitely not for that. Not night-cap images tomorrow either, but who knows what the evening will bring. Take care.
That's a mighty steep price, lens is showing circa £1,500 in UK, I suppose fright and import taxes would soon eat into the differential. Would Nikon strike a deal with you for reviewing it and giving feedback to them? Excellent images as always, really liked the little cottage.
Happ 2021, Richard! Very coincidental you made this video - Over the last week, I was just thinking about a new lens - the 20MM as you like! I also have wanted a 16-35MM (I shoot a Canon EOS R.) I thought - well, a 16-35 has 20 MM in its range so maybe kill two birds with one stone! BUT I am worried about chromatic aberration as my Canon 50MM 1.8 lens has ( Very Bad!) Just wondering if a zome lens has more than a fixed lens? Or is it a problem that is lens-specific ( in other words if I got another 50MM 1.4 lens might it NOT have the issue?) Thanks again for your videos! They are very helpful!
Thanks so much Gary. From my experience the aberrations are not specific to cheap lenses or expensive ones . .they all have something. You just have to try them in the intended application and go from there. There is only the Sigma 20mm f1.4 or the Samyang 20mm f1.8 for the Canon mount.
Hi Fred, the apparent rotational speed or angular velocity of the stars is the same for all stars in the night sky but their tangential velocity increases further away from the celestial pole, which probably explains the trailing.
Thanks a lot for watching Fred and Frankie. Yes I'd suggest as many others are saying .. that the variation in distance from the celestial pole is impacting the images. This is not something I see in the longer focal lengths obviously.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Well you did mention in a previous video that you wanted to do more with the tracker in 2021. With the 15 mm on it’s way, now you have a good reason to 🙂
hi Richard! Love your videos, thank you for all of the great content! I am considering upgrading from my current crop sensor Nikon (D7500) to a full frame, possibly the D780, in an effort to improve noise handling and image quality. I really want to start doing more nightscape photography. Do you think this is a good reason to move to a full frame? Do you shoot any nightscapes on a crop sensor camera? thank you!
Thanks so much for watching Robin. Yes thats a great reason to move to full frame. You'll notice the difference for sure. The D780 sounds good but id look at the Z6 mirrorless.
@@nightscapeimages.richard thank you for the response! Yes, I have been considering that and the Z6 II, which is very hard to get at this point! Do you lean more towards mirrorless because of the Z mount lenses being so good? I worry it will be hard to adjust to the EVF, especially for birds in flight, my other favourite subject!
Great stuff. Love the photos. I shoot from a Nikon D5600, and personally I'm looking at adding the Sigma 14-24 f/2.8 dg hsm art to my collection, I could get one for around $1300 CDN from Amazon. I'd go with the Nikkor version, but it's almost $1000 more, and from what I can tell the difference is negligible for that amount of money.
Thanks Richard, very honest review :) for time lapse the left corner sharpness doesn't worry me so much, but the two week wage price tag does..... Great channel another thumbs up from Me :)
Hi Richard, any update on the Laowa 15mm f/2? I've been looking forward to a video on automatic day-to-night timelapses, which I thought you mentioned in one video you were going to do. Any further developments on that?
Hey Ben. Yes I've been using the Laowa 15mm f2 for timelapse. To be honest I've struggled a bit to get it really sharp without distortion in the corners. That's the main reason I use it for time lapses as I crop a lot of that out anyway. I have been doing quite a bit of testing regarding the auto day to night time lapses . .I'll continue testing then show some of the results.
@@nightscapeimages.richard great to hear about the timelapse. I myself use qdslr dashboard with the internal wifi on the Z cameras, and it seems to work ok. Have you been able to get it to transition automatically? If so, how reliably? And do you use the internal intervalometer or an external one? It would also be great to know if it does both day-to-night and night-to-day.
@@bencollins7684 Thanks Ben. Yes the Z6 does a very smooth transition and I've been experimenting with both A & P modes to do so. I use auto iso and exposure smoothing.
Interesting review Richard, great shots as usual. Did you tell nikon about the soft focus in the left corner, I think they need to look at that for the price its marketing at! Not something that would ever be in my financial grasp. Ive just got a samyang 14mm 2.8 for £182, bargain on ebay! Haven't had chance to try it, weather not too great in uk at the moment and we're in our 3rd national lockdown. So cant travel out of area. Hope things are better for you down under
Thanks a lot Suzanne. Things are a lot better here regarding pandemic. There are a few random cases scattered about the place but all are returned travelers. I hope you get through ok over there.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Everyone is just fed up with it now, and its out of control here again, cos of the new strain. But thankfully my family and I are well so far, I have your videos to look forward to
Hi Richard, that is really strange one corner top the other mediocre. Excited to hear you will try the laowa lense. I got the olympus equivalent 7,5 mm f2.0 It is super light weight (114g) and small. The quality in the corners is more at the left hand corner side level of the lense u showed. But as soon as the calendar arrives you can have a look at your own. I am searching for a mft equivalent of the 20 mm lense of yours because you like it so much. But there is not much choice. My momentaneus favourite is the panasonic 10-25 mm f1.7. Reviews are great quality wise The downsides are size and weight (600 g) For mft it is a lot. and the prize 1800€ That was the prize of the brand new OMD EM1Mk3. Just ridiculous high. This hobby becomes more and more expensive ^^ I am not sure if I got the gear gathering syndrom :-P So I am a bit stuck with only about 1000 € more I could go for full frame. But on the other side I love mft and even nightscape quality is fine. Yeah you see decision making is an issue :-P
Thanks a lot Steffen. Yes it's always hard to get the right lenses . .even more so for M4/3 mount. The Panasonic 12mm f1.4 is very good. But of course that's 24mm equivalent.
I have an old 4/3 lens 12-60 mm f2.8 at 12 mm I use it with an adapter. You can get a heap of 12mm for mft, but 10 mm is a problem. Especially when you aim for f2.0 or less. Just checked your suggested one. It is sold for 1200 € .. Then I would tend to the 10-25. But I guess I will think a while about that. But as I said I am interested about your opinion of the laowa. greetings
Thanks for watching. Yes I have quite a few videos on this subject. See here: ruclips.net/video/tSjv5_bCzao/видео.html or here: ruclips.net/video/a35gttmohBw/видео.html or here: ruclips.net/video/rneALKIofCI/видео.html
I have owned Sony 16-35 2.8 GM and have had the same issue. one corner of the image will have a noticeable star trails when we zoom in and another corner won't. I am not sure if I have owned a bad copy one or this is a nature of wide zoom lens tbh.
Very good review Richard, many thanks. Looks like a dodgy copy to me, which is really sad for such an expensive lens. What I don't understand is that if you focus to infinity, even if you are not 100% spot on, why would you see one corner sharper than the other, if both targets are so far away. I think that that was a de-centred lens. I was waiting for that lens for a while but when it was announced, the price but even more the huge filters that would be required pushed me to the 14-30 f4 to use for landscapes. For nightscapes the 20mm f1.8 s is just superb. It would be nice to see how you get on with the Laowa.
Hi, which prime lense in the range 14-16mm would you recommend for milky way photography for the Nikon Z6ii? (in terms of quality and it should work good together with the camera)
There are not too many available for the Z mount. Laowa 15mm f2, Samyang 14mm f2.8 or this lens Nikon 14-24 f2.8Z. You can also adapt a Sony 14mm f1.8 lens via a Megadap adaptor. megadap.net/product/megadap-sony-e-to-nikon-z-autofocus-adapter-etz21/
I think you where shooting through a cloaked Klingon cruiser up there on the left. They are watching you. I have the sigma 14-24 for L-mount, have to test it for sharpness (if we ever have clear skys here).
Hey Pete. Yes I bought a Laowa 15mm f2 in a Z mount. It's pretty good in the centre but not sharp in the corners. I was actually a bit disappointed with it and really only use it for timelapses as I can crop the image a bit with those. The build quality is excellent and the size and weight are really good. Maybe I just got a bad copy.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Many thanks Richard. Been racking my brains as to which lens to get for the R6 at a reasonable price range. Currently between the Laowa and the Sigma 14mm f1.4. Tough choice lol
@@nightscapeimages.richard I am getting the sense that irix might be better than laowa but I cannot confirm that. I would be interested in getting one though some time in the future.
@@nightscapeimages.richard true! Being able to borrow a lens from a company to try it as you did is a great luxury. Otherwise you need to rely either on the internet for info or to personally invest money in a product and figure out things as you go.
I agree that thee start trails increase as you deviate from the pole star ..... but the lens is slightly "de-centered' on the top left ............. good shooting btw !!
The good thing is you know just how sharp that lens can be without the imposition of paying the eye watering price tag ........ sort of like two romantics ships passing in the night !!
Great real life review on that lens. Also great you didn't beat around the bush regarding the price. Holy moly, 3.500 $aus (2.500€) for a zoom lens... wtf? And its still slightly de-centered (I too think the left corner trails were due to higher "star-speed", but still not in every image). So what about quality control? I somehow have the feeling the camera + lens industry slowly turns in to the printer + color cartridges industry. Same pattern. You can pick up a simple printer for less than 100€, sometimes as cheap as 50€. The surprise shows up the moment you need new printer color cartridges. The original branded ones are more expensive than the printer itself... Lens prices have skyrocketed in the past years while bodies have dropped in price (in relation to the new features they're offering). Lenses on the other hand have almost no new features. They just become a little sharper, a little less prone to CA and other artefacts, maybe a little lighter (still as rugged and weathersealed also?) but basically new lenses ("mark II" or optimized for new bayonettes) just still do the same: they cover a range of focal lengths and apertures. I'm really puzzled how the average, even photo-enthusiastic, Joe can afford a collection of standard lenses each priced at way over 2.000€... thats the reason why reasonably priced third party lenses show up more and more! And they're easily ranging between really good (Laowa, etc.) and really excellent (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) in quality already, getting better by the day. And covering more focal lengths and apertures compared to the original brands. Just to name a few: Sigma 18-35/1.8, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Sigma 150-600/f5-6.3, Tokina 11-16/2.8, etc. Sure, some of those are also pricey, but thats for the extra speed and/or focal range! Again, I really appreciate you clearly stated this situation and publically opted for the better suited (price, quality, weight) third party lens. Good on'ya!
I just purchased a z7ii coming from Olympus om-d e-1 mkiii and I do allot of night photography. I was thinking of getting the z mount 20 mm 1.8 what are your thoughts
@@nightscapeimages.richard I do have a question tho. Have you used the new rokinon 14 mm zmount lens I'm not seeing anything about it in your videos. If you have used it is it any good
Hello Richard, and Happy New Year! Agree with the comments that star trailing on the left side would be due to the stars moving faster on the left, relative to the right side based on positioning. Another downside of ultra wides. And in that first image you went through you were at a 20 sec exposure, where some of the others it was 15 sec and didn't have as much trailing. I'm not sure if others may have mentioned this, but some of the images that you were doing a right/left comparison were in a portrait orientation, and therefore you would really be comparing top and bottom of the right side of the lens. So, if there was actually some distortion with the left side of the lens, which I don't think was the case, it would actually be in your foreground and you're not going to really notice it much there in the compositions you had. Also, at 21:05 you can see some similar star trailing at the bottom in fact, at least to me, even though you said it looked sharp. That's the bottom left side since it was a landscape shot and it seemed to be similar to the top left corner for that image, again indicating more of a star relative motion rather than any lens distortion. It's always possible that the lens had some slight decentering, but I would not expect that on that lens. It will be interesting to see when you get your other lens if you were to repeat the same images and get some kind of comparison to the Nikon 14-24 for sharpness. Overall, it was great to see that there was no coma aberration. My 14-24mm f2.8 F-mount has some coma aberration, and the 24mm f1.4 F-mount that I rented once was terrible for coma aberration wide open.
Thanks a lot for watching Robert. Yes a few others have mentioned the same thing regarding star movement relative to the celestial pole proximity . .makes a lot of sense. No doubt it's a very sharp lens for sure. I just received the Loawa 15mm f2. One shot only but at this stage it's nowhere near as sharp as the Nikon Z lenses . .we shall see moving forward.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Have you looked at the Rokinon 14mm f2.4, or the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art Series? They're both supposed to be pretty sharp, although the Rokinons sometimes have issues with decentering and you may have to go through a couple to get a good one. I think they both suffer from coma aberration and vignetting as well, but are otherwise sharp. The Sigma is in-between the Nikon and the Rokinon in price. But, I don't think either of them are made in a Z-mount as of yet, so may be a deal breaker for you.
@@Robert-R Hey Robert. Samyang do make a version of their 14mm f2.8 lens for Nikon Z mount .. but I'm reluctant to go back to that brand. I've had 3 and never liked any of them. I would assume the 14mm f2.4 is a better build of lens but at the price they want for it . .it should be. The Sigma 14mm doesn't come in Nikon Z mount.
So to shoot at 14mm focal length with a Z lens at 2.8 or faster, the 14-24 is the only option? There is no 14mm prime? I am using the F mount 14-24 on my Z9 but will be upgrading to the Z 14-24. I shoot mostly at 2.8 so the f4 version is not something I would consider. Being able to go from 14 to 24 means not having to carry a bunch of primes at those focal lengths and you don't have to keep changing them. Yes, it is expensive, but it is an investment that you will easily recover the bulk of the cost later when you sell them. It is certainly not as expensive as most of my other Nikon lenses ...
The Nikon Z14-24 f2.8 is a very good lens . .better than the earlier F mount 14-24 The only way to shoot 14mm faster than f2.8 on a Z camera is to adapt a Sony 14mm f1.8 or a Sigma 14mm f1.4 in Sony mount.
The lens appears to be a little bit de-centered. In fact I would say that the upper right hand side is a little bit too sharp, it's as good as it is in the middle, but the upper left is weak. I don't think it's because of the direction the lens was pointing in. It's a lens to return to Nikon! In fact a basic test everyone should do when buying any lens is to place something small - such as a street sign - in each of the 4 corners, as well as right in the middle of the lens, then compare these 5 objects zoomed in and cropped to a similar size. Most lenses have a little bit of de-centering, but if it is significantly noticeable then the lens should be returned.
The lens is good! By the rotation of the earth the stars far away from the celrstial pole seems to move faster than stars close to the celestial pole. A wide angle can get much more sky. If you have south celestial pole in right corner, on the left corner you have for sure more trailing at 14mm. In portrait orientation are the same.. with south celestial pole low in the right corner, the upper left corner will show a little trailing! In fact, when he switch to portrait orientation, the trailing is shown on the same corner; if it was a decentred lens the upper left in portrait will got to be good, because was the right upper on landscape orientation!
Hi Richard , yeah i have the same issue with the tamron 15-30 2.8 canon mount , but i have found if you try it at different focal lenghts eg18 or 20 mm it isn't that bad , i think they have a sweet spot in them . Still not as sharp as the 18mm zeiss 2.8 , nothing beats that lense in the ef mount . so i found my self not using the tamron for night scapes any more . The Nikon is very sharp , as you say the price is of putting , but if i had to use it i would just crop the image to suit if it was that noticeable at a normal a2 print .
What a lovely lens Richard, I have the 14-30mm z lens and use it 90% of the time. Say what you will about Nikon but they best Glass. All the best mate.
Good afternoon, I want to know, maybe you have already bought Laowa 15mm? Very interesting, are you satisfied with the image quality? I found that F system lenses (Sigma 14mm, Sigma 14-24mm, Nikon 14-24mm, Sigma 28mm) give poor image around the edges with an FTZ adapter. I wrote about this in Nikon, but they still pretend that everything is in order. I did many tests and the conclusion is unambiguous - the adapter cannot be used for astrophotography, and now I have to sell all the lenses F. Interestingly Laowa is made on the basis of the FTZ adapter or Z lenses. This should be seen by the quality of the stars in the corners. For example, Samiang added an adapter to the lens of the F system and sells it as a lens for the Z6. I am convinced that there is a bad image.
Thanks so much for watching Vitalis. To be honest I'm not overly impressed with the quality if the Laowa 15mm Z mount. Lots of corner aberrations but I'm mainly using it for timelapse work so ill be cropping a lot anyway.
@10:00 How come the top right corner of the lens in the first check was FINE and the SAME corner in portrait mode comes wrong??? Don't you think that YOU don't face the sky properly or something else gone wrong???
Well I think it's the fact that this lens is very wide angle and the star speeds are different depending on where they are in relation to the pole. This has been discussed a bit already and I tend to think this is the reason.
That's a fair point you and quite a few others have made, although I wasn't able to check all the corners so it's hard to make a definitive judgement. As others have said, it's most likely the variation in distance from the celestial pole.
Interesting analysis. Looking at my currency converter, if you wanted the lens, you would be much better buying it in the US. For some reason, $3,500 Australian dollars is not the currency-adjusted equivalent of $2,400 US dollars.
@@HorizonsDevelopmentKit Fair enough. There is considerable discussion about the need to fine tune Z series cameras with native Z lenses. I've never seen the need to do so. I think it's only necessary for auto focus performance anyway.
@@nightscapeimages.richard oh, I forgot that Manual Focus is being used Richard, so sorry, love your work your an inspirational character and with your charisma you could seriously moneterise in a number of areas giving you multiple money streams.
"Lots of satellites these days". Even more coming with Starlink and other companies rushing satellites into space. What will the future hold for Nightscape Images and the rest of us? Hoping they darken them to solve the problem or maybe we need a program that not only stacks, but removes satellites.
Can they be finished with a very low reflective surface? Any light coming from them is reflected from the sun surely. On the other hand they'll probably get damn hot if they're not reflecting...
A bit of an update. I have recently purchased this lens. It is much better than the one I tested and I think it's as good as you can get at this focal length for the Nikon Z cameras. .however the price is extremely high. I did buy the Laowa 15mm f2 but it's not a patch on this lens. Thanks for watching.
I have no experience using this lens and, as I predominantly photograph wildlife, very little experience with wide lenses. However, I've watched Ken Rockewell's video on this lens and he does mention that the corners on this lens (and other ultra-wides without lens stabilisation) can be soft if you have body stabilisation engaged (because the corners of the sensor move 50 per cent more than the centre to achieve the same degree of stabilisation). I don't know if this would explain some of what you've experienced? I doubt it though, because it. doesn't explain why you have one sharp corner! Anyway - the video is here... ruclips.net/video/qgJYh_sonD8/видео.html
I know you said in your opinion there were no issues with coma at f2.8, but that is not what I saw in your images. Plenty of coma to my eyes. Looked like you needed to stop this down quite a bit, perhaps has much as f5-f5.6 to get rid of it. Its not the worst I have seen for a lens such as this. Sony and Canon similar lenses are worse at f2.8, but clear up by f5.6. I suspect this lens will probably be on par with the Z 14-30 f4 when it comes to astro when both are properly stopped down, except you get a little more range with the Z 14-30 f4 that is useful in practice. And its smaller, lighter, cheaper, plenty sharp, and native. I suspected the Z 20 f1.8S was an anomaly, and based on what I have seen there that is holding true. Nikon has never made a better astro lens, IMO.
Thanks for watching free88. The further you go with this nightscape journey, the more you lower your expectations with photographic equipment that is not specifically made for shooting the stars in very trying circumstances. This lens is very good compared to the vast majority of similar lenses I've used .. but of course this must be balanced with the cost/performance ratio. I agree that the Z20 f1.8 is one out of the box. Also a lens that has to be stopped down to f5.6 to be perfect isn't actually perfect for nightscape at all in my opinion .. therefore compromises must be made when shooting. I don't regard a little coma as being a great problem in the big picture .. after all, there are so many elements which go into a great image. Obviously if we shoot the stars with a star tracker then we can use a slower aperture lens to get much better results but that adds further blending and post processing issues. Nothing is ever easy but the challenge is certainly there to get better results. Appreciate your comments.
Yeah, that's a whole lot of money for a lens! You gotta be able to make money and get a good return, spending money like that for sure and it better perform flawlessly, maybe even make ya breakfast once in a while too lol.
Difference of star trails is because that stars are moving at different speeds depending on how close they are to the pole. If those are star trails, it's not the problem of the lens.
Thanks a lot Y H. Yes you are right . .and others have suggested the same thing. It's something I've not noticed so much before and I assume this is partly because of the sharpness of this new lens. Appreciate your insights.
@@nightscapeimages.richard it had me also thinking. The problem was always showing up in the left corner of the picture, ob both the horizontal shot and the vertical shot... It wasn't the same corner of the lens or of the sensor, so it had to be something else. :D
@@danielpopa6243 Yes it's an interesting thing for sure. I reckon the lens's sharpness exaggerates it.
My thought too and I'm new to this!
To me there is clear softness in one corner on top of the additional movement in the stars. I have a Tamron lens that shows a similar effect, no matter what direction I point the lens. Sample variation on these 14-24 is ridiculous, suggest it is decentered
Hi Richard, Just a thought on the star trails on the left side of the image. Because of the wide-angle, if the right side was more toward the south the stars would be moving slower than the stars to the north on the left side of the image. I may be way off, but one idea on why you see trails.
I think this is dead on. You can especially tell because when he starts pointing it out again at around the 10 minute mark the camera is in portrait orientation, there for the"good" top right corner of the lens from the landscape orientation of the image is now the top left corner.
You beat me to it John. In one shot with trailing, Orion is to the left of the Large Magellanic Cloud, which would support your theory that the right hand corner of the image is closer to the south celestial pole. Might (probably?) explains the trailing, unless Richard was using a tracker.
Thanks a lot for your comments John. Yes I've responded to a lot of others who suggest the same thing and I think you're right. I did notice on a few shots that the left side seemed a little softer than the right side but overall .. this is a very sharp lens and I think it's easy to see any variation in focus technique. I really appreciate you watching.
@@peglessebco Thanks a lot for watching Nathan. See the responses here for similar comments .. you are correct.
Cheers Richard, I bought this lens and love it. I did sell a kidney, but it’s OK she has another one, the wife that is.. I’m using the lens now and getting some great results.
Would love an updated tutorial on nightscape pano and your workflow for stitching etc.
Haha, good on you Michael. I hope the wife is feeling better ..!!! Yes it's extremely sharp and I can see how good it would be for landscape or architectural photography as well. I have done some videos on panos. See here: ruclips.net/video/a35gttmohBw/видео.html
Interesting lens! Like others have said, the main reason for more obvious trailing on one side of the image vs the other is distance from the pole. Your shutter speeds exaggerated the issue because you'll always get slight trailing at 20sec & 14mm unless using a very low res sensor. It was a little better with the 15s sample. For perspective, I get trailing at 14mm even with 8 secs on my A7Riv at 61MP! Did you centre focus or corner focus? Most of these 12-24 and 14-24 zooms are best when focused off-centre to account for field curvature; focusing on the centre will lead to worse average sharpness across the frame. Clear skies!
All very good observations Tim. I agree with you regarding focusing off centre with these wide angles for sure. Thanks for watching.
Excellent tour de force of the lenses capability
Thank you very much NikCan, appreciate you watching.
Always learn something from you. Thanks Richard
Thanks so much for watching Leonie, really appreciate your comments and support.
Hi Richard, thank you for the great video. Do you mean the 20/1.8 Z is the better choice for nigthscape than the 14-24/2.8 Z?
Thanks in advance.
Kai
In my opinion its a better option. But obviously if you need wider than 20mm then the 14-24 is better.
Happy New Year Richard. Good to see the new lens. Really beautiful shots 👌
Thanks a lot my friend, really appreciate the comments.
Again great Video! Thank you. Looking forward to my 20 1.8s coming next week.
Thanks so much for watching Michael. You'll love the 20mm lens.
@@nightscapeimages.richard I have no doubt about it, I already liked the F mount Version.
Will you do a review of the laowa?
Im not sure
If it is indeed a lens problem, then it shows up mainly in the horizontal images. Once you put it in vertical orientation, the top left becomes the bottom left and you don't have stars there and distortions are much more difficult to detect in grass or other ground features. Just a thought.
Yes very good thoughts Matt. I was being very picky with this lens. Overall it's very good but I've now sent it back.
Hi Richard, I have seen similar issues in the top left corner of wide angle lenses. I put this down to the large field of view going more to the east than the rest of the image as that are of the sky moves much faster and may not be an issue totally with the lens, Taking images at 10 seconds or less would help clarify that. Regards
Thanks a lot Les. Yes I think you are correct. A few others have noted the same thing. Really appreciate you watching.
Richard, you are going to luv the 15mm lens you have on order. My wife uses one on her z7 15mm f2.0. It takes fantastic photos of the night sky. As you said all manual but once you get it focused does a great job.😀
Thanks a lot Andrew. I'm looking forward to testing it out.
Great video mate, some beautiful photos
Thanks a lot as always Brad.
Thanks for the video and review mate. Have a word with Nikon and try and get your hands on the new 50mm. Would love to see the picture quality wide open at f/1.2 for astro.
That's a good idea Craig. I'll see how I go with that.
thanks for that review. I have also been looking at that Laowa lens for Z6. Curious to see your experience once you spend some time with it.
Thanks a lot James. Hopefully the Laowa does the job.
Interesting, but the only way to accurately star test a lens is to place the camera on a star tracker to eliminate any star trailing which will vary with distance from the celestial pole, as others have pointed out and mimic aberrations. And then it’s best to take in as much sky as possible so there are stars in all corners. Even the tilt of the camera with a heavy lens can cause the lens to shift or sag, perhaps shifting the focal plane or perhaps the lens elements. If the lens is permanently decentered then the aberrations will stay in the same place relative to the frame regardless of camera orientation. If the top left was soft in landscape orientation then that corner becomes the top right in portrait if the camera is turned clockwise. If the same corner appears soft no matter what orientation the camera is in then it could be a physical sagging of the lens on the mount. Shooting a tracked shot straight up would be telling! Thanks! I enjoy your videos from Oz.
Thanks a lot Alan, really appreciate your insights. Yes I think you and the others may well be correct about the slight extra star trailing caused by the extra movement further away from the celestial pole. As I mentioned in the video I only had one opportunity to shoot with the lens and it was a bit rushed. It's a very good lens overall but at least here in Australia quite expensive.
@@nightscapeimages.richard in the US it is $2300 US - so yes expensive here too!
@@gosman949 Yes it sure is Jay, thanks for watching.
Thank you so much for posting your wonderful videos, I’ve picked up some really useful knowledge I’d never have got from reading through heaps of articles. It’s always helpful to see someone actually doing something, rather than showing the finished photo, with no idea how they got there! If at all possible (and I’m sorry if I’ve missed something that covered this) but I’d love a video that covers what I could expect from gear I actually own (or can afford!) photography is an expensive hobby, and it’s possible to spend a small fortune on equipment, but I’m trying to get the best results from old, secondhand, budget gear that I’ve had to save for ages to buy!
I’d be interested to know what to expect from budget equipment, and how much of your obvious talent is down to skill and technique, and if it’s possible to get good results from old and inexpensive equipment please!
Keep up the great work!! It’s very inspiring!
Thanks very much for your encouraging comments Andrew. I did a video a while back about using standard equipment. See here: ruclips.net/video/1GynWrNxts0/видео.html
@@nightscapeimages.richard thank you for this! I figured you’d have done something for us noobs, but couldn’t find it!! I’ll give it a whirl, and see what I can pick up!! Thank you for the prompt reply! Stay safe sir!! ;)
@@andrewandlee Always happy to help Andrew
Hi Richard, have you formed an opinion on the 15mm Laowa? I'd certainly be interested to hear your thoughts.
Yes I've had the Laowa for a couple of years now. Nowhere near as good as the Nikon lens. In fact I rarely use it these days . .stars in the corners are elongated .. so I typically keep it for time lapses. I've just tested the new Nikon 17-28 f2.8 and I'll have a video out tomorrow about that lens.
@@nightscapeimages.richard cheers, thanks Richard. I just watched your take on the 17-28mm (great stuff) and thanks for the feedback on the Laowa. The 17-28 looks good. So far I've generally shot with my Tamron 15-30 on D750 and been quite happy with the results. I had a play with some longer focal lengths on the weekend and loved the framing but, especially with my Nikon 50mm F, they have significant coma on the edges (birds with their wings wrapped right over their heads). I now realise how lucky I was with the 15-30mm Tamron and that I need to look into the performance of future lenses before waving the credit card around. Love your work and really enjoy your videos and thanks for the feedback.
@@ashleybetts5664 Thanks again for your support Ashley.
nice clip again thanks Richard. The funny thing is that the top right and top left image sharpness doesn’t really change when you shift from landscape to portrait orientation.
Thanks a lot Adam. Yes it's a bit weird. But I think the lens is very good but like most lenses it needs care in focusing.
Thanks for another great review Richard. I shoot with Canon 5D MkIV and recently purchased a Sigma 14mm-24mm, f 2.8. Very happy with the sharp results and was about ½ cost of Canon 16mm-35mm with less than stellar reviews for coma. Looking forward to hearing about your review on the 15mm Laowa.
Thanks a lot for watching Bob. Yes I've heard very good things about that Sigma 14-24 lens.
Looks cool!
Have you had the chance to try pictures in the Z5 or the Z6ii?
Not yet Colton, but I will have a Z6ii in a few weeks.
I enjoyed this vid - why not just manually set focus at infinity when shooting images of stars?
Thanks Andy. That is what l do generally.
G'day Richard. Good revue with great images to back up your words. I was stunned though when you said $3500!! Way out of my league. Thanks mate, stay safe.
Thanks a lot John. Yes that lens is so hot it's very hard to hold onto ..!!! Appreciate you watching as always.
LOL Good one mate :)
great video Richard i love the image with straw bale all the best phill
Thanks a lot Phill. Yes you can't beat a good hay bale shot.
I wonder if there was a minor variance in the inner lens alignment. With so many internal parts, a slight mis-alignment could be the issue. Especially on a rental or press review lens that's been run hard and put away wet more than a few times (ever driven a clean running, no issue rental car?). One thing I did discover was how much the curving at the bottom (fence lines, rail tracks) and inward slanting trees were a distraction for me. I really didn't realize how much that effect was for a wide angle. I have seen other reviews of the lens, but they were landscapes with focus points quite a distance from the camera. Your review is the first one showing how distorted it can be. Looking forward to your review of the Loawa 15 mm lens. Thanks for the awesome review! Here's to a you and yours having an excellent new year.
Thanks a lot MAC. Yes you are possibly quite right about the lens being a rental/lend review item. Some of my images were panoramas which will exaggerate the curved perspective. Really appreciate your comments.
Very interesting review. Even before you said it, my thought was " not at that price". I have the S 14-30 f4, a great little lens, also light and sharp. The f4 is not such a problem as the sensor is so good, one can push the iso and also do stacking. Like you, my goto lens is the 20mm f1.8 - really good. In hindsight it might have been interesting to try focusing on a spot in the top left and then top right, to see if there were differences, also may be to swing camera around so the stars in top right are then in top left. In my experiance, all the S lenses are very sharp, they are all better than any of the old F lenses ( though these were also good ). Loved the pics, in particular the single tree pano and the haybail.
Thanks as always David. Yes you are right, I should have shot in a different direction . .and even just straight up with only stars in the frame. Never mind, then lens is safely back at Nikon HQ ... appreciate your comments.
Thanks for the review Richard, I liked the critique not because I was considering the lens but just what to look out for. I think I have mentioned before that I have been using the Laowa 7.5mm f/2 (15mm full frame equivalent) since the summer. Being totally manual on my micro 4/3 Lumix GX8 presents no problem at night or in the daytime.As it is a prime there's no chance of moving the focal length accidentally either. It is incredibly sharp, small compared to that Nikon beast you have reviewed (weighs just 170g) it's also rectilinear so minimal distortion for such a wide angle. Yep, completely happy with it, hope you find the same and look forward to your review.
Thanks a lot Peter. Always very much appreciate your input.
Well Done Richard Great info See you Next weak !
Thanks so much for watching as always Jeff.
Hi Richard,
It appears from your "review" that one doesn't always get better images with massively more expensive lenses.
Thanks for sharing your experiences.
JohnV
Thanks for watching John. You are correct. There is a sweet spot in there somewhere between cost and performance. This lens is very good but the cost is a bit high for casual use.
Hi, Richard. Any chance you could bung this lens on your star tracker? And/Or do a brick-wall test? That might be a conclusive test for L vs R sharpness (and add more content to your channel!!)
That's a very good idea Grossie. I should have done that for sure . .problem is ..the lens has been sent back to Nikon now. Appreciate you watching.
Spot on review Richard and I think this is the most unbiased and honest review I’ve seen on this lens. I’m with you. The price just can’t be justified for what you’re getting. Basically the same price as a camera alone. As a landscaper I’d prefer the cheaper 14-30mm F4 S lens as I never venture below F8. You could buy 2 good primes (like what you have) for the price of that 14-24mm S lens. Thanks so much for the video mate, cheers 🍻 👍🙏
Thanks so much for that Adrian. To be honest I only really had one good outing with the lens . .and it is extremely sharp. But of course the price is still very high for us here in Oz.
But every time you change your lenses, that pesky dust gets on your sensor!
Hi Richard. I know that you are using Nikon for you astrophotography and since I have great respect of your work i thought I could ask your opinion on something that has to do with a lens choice for astrophotography. I am about to order my Nikon z6 II + ftz adapter and I want to ask you if I could use the AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 D lens as an alternative to the Nikkor Z 20mm f/1.8 S which is almost double the money? Thank you anyway, and that's ok if you don't know this lens.
Hi George, sorry for my late response. I've been away at a photography workshop. I wouldn't recommend the older Nikon 20mm f2.8D lens. A friend of mine has one and it has lots of coma in the corners. I'd look at the newer model "F" mount lens if you want to get something cheaper than the 20mm Z mount. The 20mm f1.8G . .then you can use your FTZ. It's not as good as the Z native lens but pretty good all round . .especially at f2.8. Hope that's helpful.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Hey Richard, thank you so much for your help. This definitely helps me avoiding buy gear that would disappoint me. I will try to see if i can get my hands on this f1.8G lens.
Hi Richard,
Happy New Year!
Laowa 15m f/2 is a great little lens. I bit of vignetting, but no coma and is sharp!
Looking forward to your experience and video about it👍🏼
But I think you will enjoy it😊
And yeah, I think as some pointed out about the 14-24S, the corner trailing could be because of the position in regards to the pole, as the lens is so wide, or could be a bad variation of the lens .
Thanks a lot Altair. It is a loan lens that I had so it may have had some rough handling. I agree that it may also be a result of the proximity to the pole.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Hi Richard,
I think it might've been a bad copy of 14-24S I've seen few other videos on RUclips and no left corner issues.
It would be great of Nikon could lend you 14-24S again for a bit longer, so you could do a proper comparison to Laowa 15 f2 & Z 20 1.8S 😊
Not sure how possible it is🤣
Anyways, have a great day & hope your cuppa is hot👍🏼
@@Byaltair Thanks again Altair.
Hi Richard nice vid as usual. I have the Sigma version for my 6D and sometimes get the same thing happen I put it down to rotation, when checking the spot star function in PhotoPills it recommends 9.8seconds.
It's an interesting observation Gavin. You are most likely correct. The lens is very sharp and that makes it a lot easier to see the differences.
Hi, I take it that you only shot with the lens in the vertical position and then created your panorama shots. I wonder if the sharpness issue is with thatt lens only. Did you report your results to the Nikon people who gave you the lens to shoot with? I love your images and the way to stack your photos to create beautiful photographs, really very special. You really do a very detailed lens review. I appreciate all your details and knowledge. You are a very unique photographer. Thank you very much for your review of the "expensive" wide angle zoon lens. No doubt it is expensive due to the high cost of manufacturing and the limited lenses available. Thank you again. 📸 ⭐️ 🌟 💫 🌟
Thanks very much for watching Joel, also for the kind words of encouragement. I did shoot quite a lot of images in the horizontal plane as well. The lens is very good overall.
Hello Richard .... Great review .. I do appreciate the integrity in which you appraised the lens and the basis for your conclsions.
Perhaps a comparison to the F mount equivalent lens would have been helpful too.
Stay sate
Regards
Rob
Thanks a lot Robbey. Yes all very good comments. It would have taken me an eternity to shoot both lenses that night as I was out for so long as it was. The new Z lens is certainly sharper and much lighter weight than the old F mount, although that lens is very good also.
Richard, looking forward to your review on the Laowa. Have been thinking about this lens myself but haven’t found many reviews that solely focus on astrophotography. From the comments below, sounds like people are happy with it.
Yes I'm looking forward to trying it out Garth. Milky Way Mike uses that lens and he did a review of it as well.
i know you didn't think about it in the field, but take a 2 second exposure at 12,800 ISO and then look at the corners. I bet all corner stars look pinpoint and sharp. But yeah...for the most part, i buy 14-X lenses for the 14mm end. I really wish Nikon would make a 14 or 15mm F/1.8 or F/2 Z prime lens.
Really good advice Ryan. Yes I totally agree with you regarding a fast aperture wide prime lens. All the Nikon Z lenses are really good I reckon.
Thanks for this review !
Focusing on infinity with the 14-24/2.8 seems to be more tricky than the 20/1.8. Don’t you use the focus infinity startup feature this time ?
Thanks a lot for watching ivoyger. Well it didn't seem to work with this lens so I made sure I did it accurately manually.
Totally with you on the lens cost and weight front Richard. Similarly for Sony, the Sony 12-24mm GM lens is extremely good for astro, however at $5300AUD I will never know. I make do with an Adapted Canon EF mount version of the Tamron 15-30mm F/2.8 G1 which I got used for a fraction of that price.
Yes I think we get the raw end of the stick here in Australia that's for sure. Appreciate your comments mate.
Thanks for the review! I'm not sure differences in star rotation account for everything there. The last example looked softer in the left corner without a noticable difference in trailing. Maybe a decentered lens? Looking forward to the Laowa review!
Thanks a lot Jim. Yes it was a little softer on that left hand side for sure. Appreciate the comments.
Thanks once again... off to look for snowy owls tomorrow so this lense definitely not for that. Not night-cap images tomorrow either, but who knows what the evening will bring. Take care.
Good on you Guy, hope it goes well.
The image of the cottage is beautiful Mate, a really nice shot 👍
As for your findings with the lens, it would be interesting to know Nikon's response.
Thanks a lot Ian. I don't think they'd care too much. For daytime shooting there would be no issues at all and the lens is very good overall.
That's a mighty steep price, lens is showing circa £1,500 in UK, I suppose fright and import taxes would soon eat into the differential. Would Nikon strike a deal with you for reviewing it and giving feedback to them? Excellent images as always, really liked the little cottage.
Thanks a lot Three-phase. I don't think any deals are likely for me.
Happ 2021, Richard! Very coincidental you made this video - Over the last week, I was just thinking about a new lens - the 20MM as you like! I also have wanted a 16-35MM (I shoot a Canon EOS R.) I thought - well, a 16-35 has 20 MM in its range so maybe kill two birds with one stone! BUT I am worried about chromatic aberration as my Canon 50MM 1.8 lens has ( Very Bad!) Just wondering if a zome lens has more than a fixed lens? Or is it a problem that is lens-specific ( in other words if I got another 50MM 1.4 lens might it NOT have the issue?) Thanks again for your videos! They are very helpful!
Thanks so much Gary. From my experience the aberrations are not specific to cheap lenses or expensive ones . .they all have something. You just have to try them in the intended application and go from there. There is only the Sigma 20mm f1.4 or the Samyang 20mm f1.8 for the Canon mount.
Morning Richard my question is the same as john height are you getting trailing on the left due to rotational speed difference
Hi Fred, the apparent rotational speed or angular velocity of the stars is the same for all stars in the night sky but their tangential velocity increases further away from the celestial pole, which probably explains the trailing.
Thanks a lot for watching Fred and Frankie. Yes I'd suggest as many others are saying .. that the variation in distance from the celestial pole is impacting the images. This is not something I see in the longer focal lengths obviously.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Well you did mention in a previous video that you wanted to do more with the tracker in 2021. With the 15 mm on it’s way, now you have a good reason to 🙂
@@frankiet5750 Yes you are correct Frankie .. I'm looking forward to it.
hi Richard! Love your videos, thank you for all of the great content! I am considering upgrading from my current crop sensor Nikon (D7500) to a full frame, possibly the D780, in an effort to improve noise handling and image quality. I really want to start doing more nightscape photography. Do you think this is a good reason to move to a full frame? Do you shoot any nightscapes on a crop sensor camera? thank you!
Thanks so much for watching Robin. Yes thats a great reason to move to full frame. You'll notice the difference for sure. The D780 sounds good but id look at the Z6 mirrorless.
@@nightscapeimages.richard thank you for the response! Yes, I have been considering that and the Z6 II, which is very hard to get at this point! Do you lean more towards mirrorless because of the Z mount lenses being so good? I worry it will be hard to adjust to the EVF, especially for birds in flight, my other favourite subject!
Yes the lenses are very good but they don't have amy native telephoto lenses.
Great stuff. Love the photos. I shoot from a Nikon D5600, and personally I'm looking at adding the Sigma 14-24 f/2.8 dg hsm art to my collection, I could get one for around $1300 CDN from Amazon. I'd go with the Nikkor version, but it's almost $1000 more, and from what I can tell the difference is negligible for that amount of money.
Hey Mike, the Sigma 14-24 f2.8 is a great lens. Lots of people recommend it.
Thanks Richard, very honest review :) for time lapse the left corner sharpness doesn't worry me so much, but the two week wage price tag does..... Great channel another thumbs up from Me :)
Thanks very much Ray, yes I agree about the 2 week wage price ... or maybe more than 2 weeks for me. Take care.
Can you test the Sony 12-24 F2.8 with A7SIII ???
Thanks a lot Jorge. I don't have that Sony 12-24 lens at present.
Hi Richard. i have the same problem in the left uppercorner with my 14-30mm f4
Interesting Peter. Thanks a lot for watching.
Очень интересно . Спасибо Ричард !
Thanks very much for watching as always Kella.
Maybe they don't like loaning out the good lenses. Does the adapter not give you good performance?
That's a possibility Bruce. The FTZ adaptor is quite good but I'm trying to get away from having to use adaptors.
Thank you Richard!
Thanks for watching Dave
Hi Richard, any update on the Laowa 15mm f/2? I've been looking forward to a video on automatic day-to-night timelapses, which I thought you mentioned in one video you were going to do. Any further developments on that?
Hey Ben. Yes I've been using the Laowa 15mm f2 for timelapse. To be honest I've struggled a bit to get it really sharp without distortion in the corners. That's the main reason I use it for time lapses as I crop a lot of that out anyway. I have been doing quite a bit of testing regarding the auto day to night time lapses . .I'll continue testing then show some of the results.
@@nightscapeimages.richard great to hear about the timelapse. I myself use qdslr dashboard with the internal wifi on the Z cameras, and it seems to work ok.
Have you been able to get it to transition automatically? If so, how reliably? And do you use the internal intervalometer or an external one?
It would also be great to know if it does both day-to-night and night-to-day.
@@bencollins7684 Thanks Ben. Yes the Z6 does a very smooth transition and I've been experimenting with both A & P modes to do so. I use auto iso and exposure smoothing.
What filter do you use for Astro photos on the 14-24 2.8?
I don't use any filters on any of my lenses for astro photos.
Interesting review Richard, great shots as usual. Did you tell nikon about the soft focus in the left corner, I think they need to look at that for the price its marketing at! Not something that would ever be in my financial grasp. Ive just got a samyang 14mm 2.8 for £182, bargain on ebay! Haven't had chance to try it, weather not too great in uk at the moment and we're in our 3rd national lockdown. So cant travel out of area. Hope things are better for you down under
Thanks a lot Suzanne. Things are a lot better here regarding pandemic. There are a few random cases scattered about the place but all are returned travelers. I hope you get through ok over there.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Everyone is just fed up with it now, and its out of control here again, cos of the new strain. But thankfully my family and I are well so far, I have your videos to look forward to
@@andysuzierawlins5462 Take care
Hi Richard,
that is really strange one corner top the other mediocre.
Excited to hear you will try the laowa lense.
I got the olympus equivalent 7,5 mm f2.0
It is super light weight (114g) and small.
The quality in the corners is more at the left hand corner side level of the lense u showed.
But as soon as the calendar arrives you can have a look at your own.
I am searching for a mft equivalent of the 20 mm lense of yours
because you like it so much.
But there is not much choice.
My momentaneus favourite is the panasonic 10-25 mm f1.7.
Reviews are great quality wise
The downsides are size and weight (600 g) For mft it is a lot.
and the prize 1800€ That was the prize of the brand new OMD EM1Mk3.
Just ridiculous high.
This hobby becomes more and more expensive ^^
I am not sure if I got the gear gathering syndrom :-P
So I am a bit stuck with only about 1000 € more I could go for full frame.
But on the other side I love mft and even nightscape quality is fine.
Yeah you see decision making is an issue :-P
Thanks a lot Steffen. Yes it's always hard to get the right lenses . .even more so for M4/3 mount. The Panasonic 12mm f1.4 is very good. But of course that's 24mm equivalent.
I have an old 4/3 lens 12-60 mm f2.8 at 12 mm
I use it with an adapter.
You can get a heap of 12mm for mft, but 10 mm is a problem. Especially when you aim for f2.0 or less.
Just checked your suggested one. It is sold for 1200 € .. Then I would tend to the 10-25. But I guess I will think a while about that.
But as I said
I am interested about your opinion of the laowa.
greetings
Could the calibration of the lens be slightly off to cause the issue? Still, for the money, it should be spot on.
Yes my thoughts exactly Mike. It's still a very good lens but not for me.
Regarding the top left streaking/star trails, do you have image stabilization turned on or off?
Thanks for watching Garland. No I had image stabilization turned off.
How do you take those panoramic photos? Do you have a video how you do them? How you edit them?
Thanks for watching. Yes I have quite a few videos on this subject. See here: ruclips.net/video/tSjv5_bCzao/видео.html or here: ruclips.net/video/a35gttmohBw/видео.html or here: ruclips.net/video/rneALKIofCI/видео.html
I have owned Sony 16-35 2.8 GM and have had the same issue. one corner of the image will have a noticeable star trails when we zoom in and another corner won't. I am not sure if I have owned a bad copy one or this is a nature of wide zoom lens tbh.
Yes I don't think all lenses are created equal. But for the price they should be excellent.
Very good review Richard, many thanks. Looks like a dodgy copy to me, which is really sad for such an expensive lens. What I don't understand is that if you focus to infinity, even if you are not 100% spot on, why would you see one corner sharper than the other, if both targets are so far away. I think that that was a de-centred lens. I was waiting for that lens for a while but when it was announced, the price but even more the huge filters that would be required pushed me to the 14-30 f4 to use for landscapes. For nightscapes the 20mm f1.8 s is just superb. It would be nice to see how you get on with the Laowa.
Thanks a lot Thanos. Yes I came to the sa,e conclusion which is why I went for the Loawa 15mm. I'll see how that one performs.
Hi, which prime lense in the range 14-16mm would you recommend for milky way photography for the Nikon Z6ii?
(in terms of quality and it should work good together with the camera)
There are not too many available for the Z mount. Laowa 15mm f2, Samyang 14mm f2.8 or this lens Nikon 14-24 f2.8Z. You can also adapt a Sony 14mm f1.8 lens via a Megadap adaptor. megadap.net/product/megadap-sony-e-to-nikon-z-autofocus-adapter-etz21/
I think you where shooting through a cloaked Klingon cruiser up there on the left. They are watching you. I have the sigma 14-24 for L-mount, have to test it for sharpness (if we ever have clear skys here).
Thanks a lot Steve. Yes you may well be right about the Klingon's . .it's a big universe out there ...!!!
Hi, great feedback about this lens.
What 14mm do you currently use for time lapse?
I've been using the older Nikon 14-24 f2.8 F mount. Just recently bought a Laowa 15mm f2 for Z mount. I haven't tried it for timelapse yet.
@@nightscapeimages.richard thanks, I was curious as I use an f mount 14mm Nikon prime but it’s the coma at the edges that’s frustrating
@@amacmedia3221 Yes very true, I know that lens.
@@nightscapeimages.richard I look forward to your review on your new 14mm
Hey Richard yes we are ripped off in AUS for lens prices. Dont you have some Sigma lenses?
Yes you're right Andrew. Currently Sigma don't make lenses to suit the Nikon Z series unless you use an adaptor.
Hi Richard, I might be mistaken here, but did you mention purchasing a Laowa lens, and if so which one and how do you rate it? Thanks
Hey Pete. Yes I bought a Laowa 15mm f2 in a Z mount. It's pretty good in the centre but not sharp in the corners. I was actually a bit disappointed with it and really only use it for timelapses as I can crop the image a bit with those. The build quality is excellent and the size and weight are really good. Maybe I just got a bad copy.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Many thanks Richard. Been racking my brains as to which lens to get for the R6 at a reasonable price range. Currently between the Laowa and the Sigma 14mm f1.4. Tough choice lol
@@nightscapeimages.richard Decided on the sigma dg 24mm f1.4 art lens, seems the business. Hopefully get it next month or so 🤞👍
Awesome
Have you ever tried the irix lenses? I have seen the NPAN (National Parks At Night) guys using them a lot and theajority of them shoot nikon cameras.
No I haven't tries any Irix lenses Marieta but they should be quite good.
@@nightscapeimages.richard I am getting the sense that irix might be better than laowa but I cannot confirm that. I would be interested in getting one though some time in the future.
@@marieta.s It's always hard to know for sure unless you can try both out side by side.
@@nightscapeimages.richard true! Being able to
borrow a lens from a company to try it as you did is a great luxury. Otherwise you need to rely either on the internet for info or to personally invest money in a product and figure out things as you go.
I agree that thee start trails increase as you deviate from the pole star ..... but the lens is slightly "de-centered' on the top left ............. good shooting btw !!
Thanks David .. my conclusions exactly.
The good thing is you know just how sharp that lens can be without the imposition of paying the eye watering price tag ........ sort of like two romantics ships passing in the night !!
@@davidmanze7563 Yes David .. trouble is . .I also can't use it now ...!!!
Great real life review on that lens. Also great you didn't beat around the bush regarding the price. Holy moly, 3.500 $aus (2.500€) for a zoom lens... wtf? And its still slightly de-centered (I too think the left corner trails were due to higher "star-speed", but still not in every image). So what about quality control?
I somehow have the feeling the camera + lens industry slowly turns in to the printer + color cartridges industry. Same pattern. You can pick up a simple printer for less than 100€, sometimes as cheap as 50€. The surprise shows up the moment you need new printer color cartridges. The original branded ones are more expensive than the printer itself...
Lens prices have skyrocketed in the past years while bodies have dropped in price (in relation to the new features they're offering). Lenses on the other hand have almost no new features. They just become a little sharper, a little less prone to CA and other artefacts, maybe a little lighter (still as rugged and weathersealed also?) but basically new lenses ("mark II" or optimized for new bayonettes) just still do the same: they cover a range of focal lengths and apertures.
I'm really puzzled how the average, even photo-enthusiastic, Joe can afford a collection of standard lenses each priced at way over 2.000€... thats the reason why reasonably priced third party lenses show up more and more! And they're easily ranging between really good (Laowa, etc.) and really excellent (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) in quality already, getting better by the day. And covering more focal lengths and apertures compared to the original brands. Just to name a few: Sigma 18-35/1.8, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Sigma 150-600/f5-6.3, Tokina 11-16/2.8, etc. Sure, some of those are also pricey, but thats for the extra speed and/or focal range!
Again, I really appreciate you clearly stated this situation and publically opted for the better suited (price, quality, weight) third party lens. Good on'ya!
Thanks a lot for your comments and insights Jiffi Joff. Really appreciate it. I totally agree.
Great review
Thanks heaps for looking Walter.
I just purchased a z7ii coming from Olympus om-d e-1 mkiii and I do allot of night photography. I was thinking of getting the z mount 20 mm 1.8 what are your thoughts
You won't regret it Tom. Both the Z7ii and Z20mm f1.8 are wonderful.
@@nightscapeimages.richard cool thanks .I have learned everything from you for my night Photography. Thanks for what you do on RUclips
@@nightscapeimages.richard I do have a question tho. Have you used the new rokinon 14 mm zmount lens I'm not seeing anything about it in your videos. If you have used it is it any good
Hello Richard, and Happy New Year! Agree with the comments that star trailing on the left side would be due to the stars moving faster on the left, relative to the right side based on positioning. Another downside of ultra wides. And in that first image you went through you were at a 20 sec exposure, where some of the others it was 15 sec and didn't have as much trailing. I'm not sure if others may have mentioned this, but some of the images that you were doing a right/left comparison were in a portrait orientation, and therefore you would really be comparing top and bottom of the right side of the lens. So, if there was actually some distortion with the left side of the lens, which I don't think was the case, it would actually be in your foreground and you're not going to really notice it much there in the compositions you had. Also, at 21:05 you can see some similar star trailing at the bottom in fact, at least to me, even though you said it looked sharp. That's the bottom left side since it was a landscape shot and it seemed to be similar to the top left corner for that image, again indicating more of a star relative motion rather than any lens distortion. It's always possible that the lens had some slight decentering, but I would not expect that on that lens. It will be interesting to see when you get your other lens if you were to repeat the same images and get some kind of comparison to the Nikon 14-24 for sharpness. Overall, it was great to see that there was no coma aberration. My 14-24mm f2.8 F-mount has some coma aberration, and the 24mm f1.4 F-mount that I rented once was terrible for coma aberration wide open.
Thanks a lot for watching Robert. Yes a few others have mentioned the same thing regarding star movement relative to the celestial pole proximity . .makes a lot of sense. No doubt it's a very sharp lens for sure. I just received the Loawa 15mm f2. One shot only but at this stage it's nowhere near as sharp as the Nikon Z lenses . .we shall see moving forward.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Have you looked at the Rokinon 14mm f2.4, or the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art Series? They're both supposed to be pretty sharp, although the Rokinons sometimes have issues with decentering and you may have to go through a couple to get a good one. I think they both suffer from coma aberration and vignetting as well, but are otherwise sharp. The Sigma is in-between the Nikon and the Rokinon in price. But, I don't think either of them are made in a Z-mount as of yet, so may be a deal breaker for you.
@@Robert-R Hey Robert. Samyang do make a version of their 14mm f2.8 lens for Nikon Z mount .. but I'm reluctant to go back to that brand. I've had 3 and never liked any of them. I would assume the 14mm f2.4 is a better build of lens but at the price they want for it . .it should be. The Sigma 14mm doesn't come in Nikon Z mount.
So to shoot at 14mm focal length with a Z lens at 2.8 or faster, the 14-24 is the only option? There is no 14mm prime? I am using the F mount 14-24 on my Z9 but will be upgrading to the Z 14-24. I shoot mostly at 2.8 so the f4 version is not something I would consider. Being able to go from 14 to 24 means not having to carry a bunch of primes at those focal lengths and you don't have to keep changing them. Yes, it is expensive, but it is an investment that you will easily recover the bulk of the cost later when you sell them. It is certainly not as expensive as most of my other Nikon lenses ...
The Nikon Z14-24 f2.8 is a very good lens . .better than the earlier F mount 14-24 The only way to shoot 14mm faster than f2.8 on a Z camera is to adapt a Sony 14mm f1.8 or a Sigma 14mm f1.4 in Sony mount.
Have you turned off the in camera lens correction...it might also happen due to in camera distortion control...it is active by default...
No I didn't try that Ari, not a bad idea . .trouble is I don't have the lens anymore. Appreciate your insights though. Thanks for watching.
Yup, $2400 US. I would take some daytime photos to check for sharpness in the corners.
I took a few casual daytime shots and they looked fantastic but I was really wanting to test it for night shooting. Thanks for watching Ted.
Good morning Richard.
Good afternoon to you Allan
The lens appears to be a little bit de-centered. In fact I would say that the upper right hand side is a little bit too sharp, it's as good as it is in the middle, but the upper left is weak. I don't think it's because of the direction the lens was pointing in. It's a lens to return to Nikon! In fact a basic test everyone should do when buying any lens is to place something small - such as a street sign - in each of the 4 corners, as well as right in the middle of the lens, then compare these 5 objects zoomed in and cropped to a similar size. Most lenses have a little bit of de-centering, but if it is significantly noticeable then the lens should be returned.
Fair comments Adam. Appreciate you watching.
The lens is good! By the rotation of the earth the stars far away from the celrstial pole seems to move faster than stars close to the celestial pole. A wide angle can get much more sky. If you have south celestial pole in right corner, on the left corner you have for sure more trailing at 14mm. In portrait orientation are the same.. with south celestial pole low in the right corner, the upper left corner will show a little trailing! In fact, when he switch to portrait orientation, the trailing is shown on the same corner; if it was a decentred lens the upper left in portrait will got to be good, because was the right upper on landscape orientation!
It looks like a certain decentering problem, IMO. Anyway, nice photos, Richard. You're the one who knocks! 💪🏻
Thanks a lot for watching TehStriker. Appreciate it.
Hi Richard , yeah i have the same issue with the tamron 15-30 2.8 canon mount , but i have found if you try it at different focal lenghts eg18 or 20 mm it isn't that bad , i think they have a sweet spot in them . Still not as sharp as the 18mm zeiss 2.8 , nothing beats that lense in the ef mount . so i found my self not using the tamron for night scapes any more . The Nikon is very sharp , as you say the price is of putting , but if i had to use it i would just crop the image to suit if it was that noticeable at a normal a2 print .
Thanks a lot Erny. I only shot this one at 14mm so I'm not too sure how it behaves at the other focal lengths.
What a lovely lens Richard, I have the 14-30mm z lens and use it 90% of the time. Say what you will about Nikon but they best Glass. All the best mate.
Thanks a lot Jeremy. I think the 14-30 is the perfect lens for landscape photography .. small, light weight, sharp and easy to use.
Good afternoon, I want to know, maybe you have already bought Laowa 15mm? Very interesting, are you satisfied with the image quality?
I found that F system lenses (Sigma 14mm, Sigma 14-24mm, Nikon 14-24mm, Sigma 28mm) give poor image around the edges with an FTZ adapter. I wrote about this in Nikon, but they still pretend that everything is in order. I did many tests and the conclusion is unambiguous - the adapter cannot be used for astrophotography, and now I have to sell all the lenses F. Interestingly Laowa is made on the basis of the FTZ adapter or Z lenses. This should be seen by the quality of the stars in the corners. For example, Samiang added an adapter to the lens of the F system and sells it as a lens for the Z6. I am convinced that there is a bad image.
Thanks so much for watching Vitalis. To be honest I'm not overly impressed with the quality if the Laowa 15mm Z mount. Lots of corner aberrations but I'm mainly using it for timelapse work so ill be cropping a lot anyway.
keep going with that 20mm f1.8. to much money for that new lnikon lens
Thanks a lot Pablo. Yes I love the 20mm f1.8 lens.
@10:00 How come the top right corner of the lens in the first check was FINE and the SAME corner in portrait mode comes wrong??? Don't you think that YOU don't face the sky properly or something else gone wrong???
Well I think it's the fact that this lens is very wide angle and the star speeds are different depending on where they are in relation to the pole. This has been discussed a bit already and I tend to think this is the reason.
Can’t be the lens if it’s ALWAYS in the top left corner, regardless of landscape/portrait orientation...
I was about to say the same.
That's a fair point you and quite a few others have made, although I wasn't able to check all the corners so it's hard to make a definitive judgement. As others have said, it's most likely the variation in distance from the celestial pole.
Do you still using the 7sIII ?
Yes I am Marcel but I bought it to produce my videos.
Interesting analysis. Looking at my currency converter, if you wanted the lens, you would be much better buying it in the US. For some reason, $3,500 Australian dollars is not the currency-adjusted equivalent of $2,400 US dollars.
Very true indeed and the reason i have an account with B&H in New York. However the taxes and freight make the price a bit closer.
Nobody asked if you used or setup the fine tune on the focus for this lens?
I'm not aware of any fine tuning on this lens on a mirrorless camera Sandy.
@@nightscapeimages.richard I have z7 ii and had to fine tune the 24-70
@@HorizonsDevelopmentKit Fair enough. There is considerable discussion about the need to fine tune Z series cameras with native Z lenses. I've never seen the need to do so. I think it's only necessary for auto focus performance anyway.
@@nightscapeimages.richard oh, I forgot that Manual Focus is being used Richard, so sorry, love your work your an inspirational character and with your charisma you could seriously moneterise in a number of areas giving you multiple money streams.
@@HorizonsDevelopmentKit Appreciate your encouragement Sandy.
"Lots of satellites these days". Even more coming with Starlink and other companies rushing satellites into space. What will the future hold for Nightscape Images and the rest of us? Hoping they darken them to solve the problem or maybe we need a program that not only stacks, but removes satellites.
Yes you are so right Mike. Sequator will do a reasonable job of removing satellites but it also removes meteors ..!!! Thanks so much for watching.
Can they be finished with a very low reflective surface? Any light coming from them is reflected from the sun surely. On the other hand they'll probably get damn hot if they're not reflecting...
@@catmonkey6826 they have been experimenting with some, I don't know if it's working or not.
@@catmonkey6826 Hard to know really . .maybe we will see some changes . .I hope so.
Do you think making sure the camera tripod is level and shooting straight on to the scene impact the sharpness in the corners?
I don't think so Allan but you never know with these ultra wide lenses. Overall it's a very sharp lens. Thanks for watching.
but I wanted to buy this lens, it's a pity that it is in the left corner. I'd rather stay on the F system.
A bit of an update. I have recently purchased this lens. It is much better than the one I tested and I think it's as good as you can get at this focal length for the Nikon Z cameras. .however the price is extremely high. I did buy the Laowa 15mm f2 but it's not a patch on this lens. Thanks for watching.
Maybe the lens needs to go on a dock and be calibrated
I don't think there is a lens dock for these lenses Andrew.
I have no experience using this lens and, as I predominantly photograph wildlife, very little experience with wide lenses. However, I've watched Ken Rockewell's video on this lens and he does mention that the corners on this lens (and other ultra-wides without lens stabilisation) can be soft if you have body stabilisation engaged (because the corners of the sensor move 50 per cent more than the centre to achieve the same degree of stabilisation). I don't know if this would explain some of what you've experienced? I doubt it though, because it. doesn't explain why you have one sharp corner! Anyway - the video is here... ruclips.net/video/qgJYh_sonD8/видео.html
Thanks for watching Mike. Appreciate the link.
I know you said in your opinion there were no issues with coma at f2.8, but that is not what I saw in your images. Plenty of coma to my eyes. Looked like you needed to stop this down quite a bit, perhaps has much as f5-f5.6 to get rid of it. Its not the worst I have seen for a lens such as this. Sony and Canon similar lenses are worse at f2.8, but clear up by f5.6. I suspect this lens will probably be on par with the Z 14-30 f4 when it comes to astro when both are properly stopped down, except you get a little more range with the Z 14-30 f4 that is useful in practice. And its smaller, lighter, cheaper, plenty sharp, and native. I suspected the Z 20 f1.8S was an anomaly, and based on what I have seen there that is holding true. Nikon has never made a better astro lens, IMO.
Thanks for watching free88. The further you go with this nightscape journey, the more you lower your expectations with photographic equipment that is not specifically made for shooting the stars in very trying circumstances. This lens is very good compared to the vast majority of similar lenses I've used .. but of course this must be balanced with the cost/performance ratio. I agree that the Z20 f1.8 is one out of the box. Also a lens that has to be stopped down to f5.6 to be perfect isn't actually perfect for nightscape at all in my opinion .. therefore compromises must be made when shooting.
I don't regard a little coma as being a great problem in the big picture .. after all, there are so many elements which go into a great image. Obviously if we shoot the stars with a star tracker then we can use a slower aperture lens to get much better results but that adds further blending and post processing issues. Nothing is ever easy but the challenge is certainly there to get better results. Appreciate your comments.
I only have money to buy one lens. 14-24 2.8 or 50mm 1.2
Well for milky way and astro landscape photography I'd choose the 14-24 f2.8. For portrait photography I'd choose the 50mm f1.2.
@@nightscapeimages.richard Thank you
The speed of stars is different. That’s not lens thing. Right top corner is probably close to the north star.
Yes I think you are right.
Yeah, that's a whole lot of money for a lens! You gotta be able to make money and get a good return, spending money like that for sure and it better perform flawlessly, maybe even make ya breakfast once in a while too lol.
Yes I'd love bacon and eggs waiting for me at breakfast each day ... !!! Thanks for watching.
Haha I bet Nikon won't be sending you any loaners anytime soon.
Well I have spent a lot of money on their products over the years. I'm not too sure they care about what I have to say anyway. Thanks for watching.
Sony sad HAHA with 14mm 1.8)))
The Sony 14mm f1.8 is a wonderful lens.