StevenBrownPhoto Loc: Excelsior, MN

I previously owned both the Sigma 10-20mm f3.5 and the Tamron 10-24mm (forget the aperture range on that one). Both worked well enough but I found too little use for them in most of my photography. If you have never used one before, suggest you rent one first. Nikon also has the 10.5mm fish eye for DX cameras.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

For the most bang for your buck, look at the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. It's a popular and well-liked lens for a very good price.
https://smile.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=tokina+11-16

wetreed

The Nikon 10-20 is the absolute best choice. I love mine. Excellent quality and a great value.

billt1970 Loc: Gambrills, Maryland

I have the Sigma for Nikon 10-20mm lens and I simply love it. I use it extensively both for landscape and real estate photography. In the real estate realm it allows you to capture 3 walls in a room with minimal distortion, so long as you use a tripod and keep the lens perfectly level.

That's about what I paid for mine. I say go for it!!

Belated Happy Thanksgiving!

Bill Taylor
Gambrills, MD

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I have that Sigma 10-20 D7000 and it’s a great lens for the price. Plus, I like the fixed minimum aperture.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

Tamron 10-24. I agree with SteveR.

yorkiebyte Loc: Scottsdale, AZ/Bandon by the Sea, OR

....and that DX 10-20 will be a ("act like" because of the 1.5x factor) 15-30mm.
Good point you made, but please follow through with the accurate info for others. The focal length of a lens is always what it is - the crop factor (DX 1.5x in this case) changes the perspective of a given lens.

HarryBinNC Loc: Blue Ridge Mtns, No.Carolina, USA

The 12-24 f4 is one of the few really excellent DX (“crop”) lenses Nikon produced. It is one of my favorite lenses, and works great on my D800 stopped down.

spraguead Loc: Boston, MA

I use the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 on my D7000. It's great. Got if in practically new condition on ebay for $250.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Essentially the same question was asked yesterday.... and the answers are still the same. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-565244-1.html#9613901

Rather than repeat it all, here's a copy of my response there:

Take your pick:

- Nikkor AF-P 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6G DX VR.... about $300. Compact, lightweight, good image quality, cheap, stabilized, uses 72mm filters... plasticky, slow (i.e., smaller max apertures) & AF-P has limited functionality on some Nikon (such as D7000, D7100... should be fine on D7200 and D7500, though you might need to update firmware... check the Nikon website for info).

- Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX "II"... about $370 (see link above for a cheaper used one). Well built and very sharp, f/2.8 aperture makes it popular for night photography (brighter viewfinder). Rather large and heavy (77mm filters), quite prone to flare issues, has been discontinued and superseded by 11-20mm f/2.8. Tokina lenses use a "focus clutch" mechanism. Works fine, but to manual focus you have to shift it to MF mode. Cannot override AF without doing that first. NOTE 1: The "II" version for Nikon has built-in focusing motor and will autofocus on all Nikon cameras. Earlier version did not have that motor and can only autofocus on Nikon with in-camera focus drive motor (D7000-series and higher presently). NOTE 2: If considering the used one at above link, I'd ask if the matched lens hood is included. It's not shown in the photos. If missing, plan on replacing it because this lens needs the hood to help with the flare. Even with the hood, there still can be flare issues. Some people work around that, don't mind it and really enjoy the lens. Others I've known returned the lens because they found the flare too much of a problem. Personally I didn't buy this lens because I see little need for f/2.8 with a superwide. Other folks' uses might need it, but "slower" f/4 and variable aperture lenses can be smaller, lighter, less expensive.

- Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM... about $400 (used to be one of the most expensive ultrawides.... Sigma had to reduce the price when Canon and Nikon introduced their "budget" ultrawides for around $300). Decent build and image quality. One of the biggest and heaviest. Uses more expensive 82mm filters.

- Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM... no longer available new (Sigma discontinued when Canon & Nikon intro'd their budget ultrawides), used prices vary. Decent build and image quality. Much smaller and lighter than the f/3.5 version. Uses 77mm filters.

- Tokina ATX-Pro 12-28mm f/4.0 DX... about $430 on sale. Current model with quite good image quality and build. Fairly large and heavy, uses 77mm filters. NOTE: This model superseded an earlier 12-24mm f/4 from Tokina... which is also a good lens and might be found used. Very similar besides the slight change in focal length range, but the older lens has more chromatic aberration than the newer model. I used a 12-24mm for quite a while (after comparing with Sigma and Tamron). If I needed an ultrawide I would seriously consider this 12-28mm now, but Canon's EF-S 10-22mm is serving me well now.

- Tokina ATX-Pro 11-20mm f/2.8 DX.... about $450 on sale. Current model that's improved over the 11-16mm above. Still sharp, but less prone to flare than the earlier lens. Better range of focal lengths, too. It's one of the bigger and heavier ultrawides, though. Uses 82mm filters.

- Tokina AT-X 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 DX fisheye... $470 on sale. Has very strong fisheye distortion at the wider settings, but acts more like a standard ultrawide at the 17mm end of the range. Built in lens hood. Cannot be used with standard filters. Special filter holder and oversize filters required.

- Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di II VC HLD... $500. An updated and improved version of a lens that's been in production for quite awhile. Image stabilization was one of the features added to this newer version.

- Tokina AT-X Pro 14-20mm f/2 DX... $600. The fastest ultrawide DX zoom anyone makes, with it's f/2 aperture (Note: Large apertures are not commonly needed for landscape photography). Rather big and heavy.

- Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM... $700. The widest non-fisheye ultrawide available for DX cameras. Still has a lot of wide angle distortion at the wide end of the range, though it's not as strong as fisheye.

- AF-S Nikkor 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED DX... $897. A fine lens in all respects, though not especially better than some of the above... just a whole lot more expensive.

- AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED DX... $1147. Another fine lens that's even more massively over-priced. (If you can find a nice one used for $350, as mentioned above, grab it!)

There are some ultrawide FX lenses too... but they are bigger, heavier and more expensive.... yet not as wide as many of the above. Sort of a waste of money to buy for use on DX cameras.

(You'll have to ignore some references to earlier response in that other post... or just visit it and read them for yourself.)

The Search feature here on UHH is really useful and helpful, BTW.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

My comment is this... if you look at the used market, you will see that many people buy wide angle lenses and end up selling them, presumably because they don't end up using them. So I'd suggest thinking about what you really want to do with a wide angle before buying one. Then consider that limitations on wide angle performance are one of the few real shortcomings of DX cameras. So there is a good chance that if you really get into the use of the lens, you may eventually be motivated to consider full frame. For that reason, you might want to consider going ahead and getting a full frame lens now. You will have to decide which one.

bcplimpton Loc: Southern New Jersey

I have the 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 which I got used on EBAY. NB it was the fourth one I bid on in one weekend before I got it for $500.00. Patience paid off. Be sure to check the seller's rating and serial number of the lens if available.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I agree with you.... with regard to FISHEYE lenses. They're pretty specialized. Fisheye lenses can be fun to use for a while, but soon the unique look of the images tends to feel repetitive. Some folks have ongoing uses for them (a friend who does a lot of airplane photography uses one frequently to take shots inside cockpits, where space is very limited). There are other uses (humorous shots is one). But for most people, fisheye are highly specialized. I had one years ago, used it a little, then eventually sold it.

But I DON'T agree with you with regard to wide angle lenses and the ultrawides (both primes and zooms, non-fisheye) such as are needed for a DX camera. Those are much more versatile, though it takes some practice to learn to use them well.

If I were in the market for a fisheye, I'd probably look at the Tokina 10-17mm because it zooms to "non-fisheye" settings too and wouldn't be as specialized as a prime fisheye.

I carry and use a 20mm (primarily for use on full frame, but also on crop at times), a 12-24mm Tokina and a Canon 10-22mm (both crop only lenses, though the 12-24 can be used to about 18mm on full frame). At least one of them is in my camera bag virtually any time I'm out shooting. They aren't lenses I use all the time (I don't do a lot of landscape or architectural shots), but they see enough use that I wouldn't want to be without.

An alternative is to use a less wide lens, take multiple shots and then assemble them into a single panorama image in post processing. Here's a rather extreme panoramic example (more than 20 shots, hand held and shot rapidly):

NCMtnMan Loc: N. Fork New River, Ashe Co., NC

I considered my info to be accurate. So it will act and operate on his D7200 as if it were a 15-30mm DX lens. I didn't mention anything about the focal length changing.

Pegasus Loc: Texas Gulf Coast

Another satisfied owner of the Nikon DX 10-20 f/4.5-5.6G. I have one for my D7500 and while I don't use it anywhere near as much as other lenses such as my excellent DX 18-140 f/4.5-5.6 or my DX 35mm f/1.8, I enjoy shooting with it in crowds of landscape.