Another shot with my 5D II and Nikon 14-24 lens

Lighthound

Thought this might be worth posting here, since I haven't seen many 5DII and 14-24G Nikon shots posted. I have a larger size version more at my photo.net gallery (see link below).



http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=139368

Tee Why

Nice tones on the image and strong composition.

scottV

wowza, i love this shot. feel like the cliff face could be toned down a bit though.

pathfinder

Very nice.

I loved your images on Photo.net as well.

Very nice work!

coscorrosa

Very nice, I like the ground level fog, and B&W was a good choice with the snow and the brightness of El Capitan.

Candid Arts

GORGEOUS photo!

One question... Why the 5D MKII and using a Nikon lens? and how?

clemensphoto's

WOW! Very nice

ian408

Which adapter did you go with?

Lighthound

Candid Arts wrote:

GORGEOUS photo!

One question... Why the 5D MKII and using a Nikon lens? and how?

I used an adapter made by Mark at 16-9.net

Candid Arts

Lighthound wrote:

I used an adapter made by Mark at 16-9.net

Why would you do this though? Not happy with Canon's Lenses?

Lighthound

Candid Arts wrote:

Why would you do this though? Not happy with Canon's Lenses?

The 14-24G is sharper, and has less distortions than the 14mm Canon prime I sold a few months ago. A number of tests have shown the 14-24 to be as sharp or sharper (stopped down) than any wide angle prime out there (and certainly any zoom), with the exception of the Zeiss 21mm Distagon. I also own the 24L, 35L, 50L and 70-200L, as well as a Zeiss C/Y 35-70, and Zeiss C/Y 35mm F1.4. On this Yosemite trip, I'd say the 14-24 was used 70% of the time, the 35-70 25% of the time, and the 70-200 about 5%. The Canon primes never made it out of the bag.

I also own a 21mm Zeiss Distagon that I love on the Canon, but the gullwing distortion can be a problem with flat horizons. I can't wait to attack Auroras with the Distagon and the 5D mkII...