On 2014-04-12 13:11:41 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article 2014041200132099509-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2014-04-12 06:37:29 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article 2014041115085031216-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2014-04-11 21:50:52 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article 201404111226536915-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, savageduck1
@{REMOVESPAM}me.com says...

On 2014-04-11 19:02:18 +0000, nospam said:

In article , Paul Ciszek
wrote:

go find something that comes close to nikon's 14-24mm. you can't. even
nikon said it's better than all fixed focal length lenses in its range
(namely the ones made 20+ years ago) and independent tests confirm it.
the real kicker is that it's a zoom lens that's better than a bunch of
fixed focal length lenses, busting that myth too.

How does it compare for aperture?

it's a constant f/2.8

Do you actually understand what that constant f/2.8 means?
That is the maximum aperture which can be maintained over the entire
zoom range.
That fine Nikkor can be stopped down to f/22.

But it will never hit 1.4 or 1.2 or 1.0 or .95.

I guess that's what maximum aperture means in this case, f/2.8.

The question was "how does it compare to fixed focal length lenses" not
"what is the smallest aperture it can use".

From time to time I will make a gesture of silliness in my remarks and
I will suffer the ignominy of being misunderstood by others. That said.
the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 is one of the finest lenses a Nikon DSLR owner
could possess, fixed focal length or zoom.

That may be true, but if if you need a wider aperture than 2.8 then it
won't do the job for you.

What job would that be, considering the capabilities of the current
generation of DSLRs?

The majority of great fixed focal length fast glass of the past were
designed in the age of film where the photographer had to live within
the limitations of film sensitivity, and at times the only answer in
questionable light was to seek out fast glass. Usually at a relatively
high cost. Narrow DoF with the resulting bokeh being a secondary result
can certainly be considered a characteristic of many images produced
with such lenses. However, that is not unattainable with some of
today's lenses.
The 14-24mm f/.2.8 mounted on a Nikon F film body is not going to
compare with an f/1.2, or f/1.4, but we are having this discussion in
rec.photo.digital.

The point regarding the high regard which the *Holy Trinity* of Nikkor
f/2.8 lenses (14-24mm, 24-70mm, & 70-200mm) is held, is they are zoom
lenses capable of extraordinary performance even when compared to the
great fast glass of the past.
The flexibility, and shot-to-shot adjustability of sensor sensitivity
found in recent DSLR cameras permits a degree of latitude, and
performance in poor light conditions only dreamed of with film and an
f/1.4, or f/1.2 lens. Regarding narrow DoF, most f/2.8 lenses are able
to deliver, with in mant cases all the bokeh you can stomach.

....but I will concede, if you really "need" a wider aperture than
f/2.8, you will be SOL with that particular 14-24mm.

--
Regards,

Savageduck