Help me pick a lens for Fall Foliage trip

net1994

Hoping someone can convince me one way or the other. I am going to the White Mountains in NH next weekend for Foliage hunting. I have a Nikon D300 and the 70-200 VR lens. Killer lens. I also have the 18-200 VR lens that is very versatile, but no way near the sharpness of the 70-200 VR. I thought I’d get something better to fill out the range below 70mm. I have rented the 24-70mm lens and while it was very sharp, I don’t think it meets the sharpness level of the 70-200VR lens. But I am thinking about giving it another try or renting the Nikon 14-24 Wide angles lens. This lens has gotten phenomenal reviews perhaps even besting the 70-200VR lens in terms of sharpness.

I reviewed the last two years of pics from my foliage trips to NH. It’s focal range is evenly divided between shots of 70-200mm or those below 70mm. I think 24-70 will be more practical, but as I said I wasn’t blown away by the sharpness. I’m really intrigued to try the 14-24 as I will be doing time-lapse photos at night with the foliage but I get the feeling it’s too specialized and I would have limited use of it. I don’t think I’ll try too many big old landscape views of the White Mountains so I would have to use the 14-24 for VERY up close shots besides my night time shot. I will also be taking photos of several waterfalls in the area.

Which do you think I would get more value out of, the 24-70mm or the 14-24mm lens?

ziggy53

If you have changed your itinerary from last year and expect to find vista landscapes, then a super-wide zoom would come in handy. While the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S is legendary for center sharpness and very good to excellent corners, other super-wide zooms are very nice in their middle apertures and go wider still.

I would have a tough time going on any trip without a "standard" zoom, and for the Nikon D300 that would be the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX or similar third party zoom.

20DNoob

I'd go wide, either the 14-24(which I've heard is nothing less than stellar) or the 17-55 like Zig mentioned. Either one would make some nice panos from the lookout points along the Kanc I imagine.

manbou

A macro will be good for individual leaves and stuff, but definitely go WIDE for some of your shots! The 14-24mm really shines in landscapes where it captures great detail across the entire frame.

Two of my own efforts, both taken at 14mm:

net1994

ziggy53 wrote:

If you have changed your itinerary from last year and expect to find vista landscapes, then a super-wide zoom would come in handy. While the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S is legendary for center sharpness and very good to excellent corners, other super-wide zooms are very nice in their middle apertures and go wider still.

I would have a tough time going on any trip without a "standard" zoom, and for the Nikon D300 that would be the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX or similar third party zoom.

Sorry I did not mention I have the Nikon 18-200 VR lens. It is damaged right now as having problems extending/retracting the barrel. Though opticaly its fine.

Does anyone feel that the 17-55 2.8 lens is any better or same than the 24-70 lens in terms of sharpness? More folks have pushed me to former than the latter. Not sure if I will do this, but seriously thinking for renting the 70-200VR for one week. Then the 24-70 for a week and then maybe the 14-24 for a 3 day rental or vice versa.