04-21-2011, 03:52 PM
[quote name='wojtt' timestamp='1303397173' post='7816']
Well, I'd agree that 20mm on FX is plenty wide for most users, but sometimes it's handy to have a zoom also in the UWA realm, and 14mm vs. 20 or 21mm makes a difference.. With price roughly the same it's just more practical to opt for the 14-24 (unless filter capability is a must) <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[/quote]
The Voigtlander 20mm f3,5 SL II is very affordable... Very compact and light and fun to use.
If you combine it with the Samyang 14mm f2.8, you still have a combination that is less heavy, less bulky, and half the price.
MF though, and in focal range not as versatile. It does give you the benefit of a very compact, light wide angle that is nice to travel with, compared to the kg heavy 14-24mm zoom. So in that sense, worth consideration.
Well, I'd agree that 20mm on FX is plenty wide for most users, but sometimes it's handy to have a zoom also in the UWA realm, and 14mm vs. 20 or 21mm makes a difference.. With price roughly the same it's just more practical to opt for the 14-24 (unless filter capability is a must) <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />[/quote]
The Voigtlander 20mm f3,5 SL II is very affordable... Very compact and light and fun to use.
If you combine it with the Samyang 14mm f2.8, you still have a combination that is less heavy, less bulky, and half the price.
MF though, and in focal range not as versatile. It does give you the benefit of a very compact, light wide angle that is nice to travel with, compared to the kg heavy 14-24mm zoom. So in that sense, worth consideration.