Non-Nikon Lens Question: Hey Folks, Looking to purchase an ultra-wide lens for my D500 in the (10-??) range and considering options from Tokina and Sigma since they seem to be at a...

Mondolinni Loc: Long Island, New York

Hey Folks,
Looking to purchase an ultra-wide lens for my D500 in the (10-??) range and considering options from Tokina and Sigma since they seem to be at a more affordable price point than Nikons for this type of lens.
Thinking it would be great to have for certain situations, but not "general" use.
All my current glass is Nikon. Can anyone offer some advice or experience on these other two brands I'm lookin at? They both seem to get fairly good reviews.
Thanks for any input

ecurb1105

I can endorse the Tokina 11-16 f2.8, I own it for my half frame bodies.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Mondolinni wrote:

Hey Folks, br Looking to purchase an ultra-wide le... (show quote)

I have the older version of the Sigma 10-20mm lens. I first got that lens when I was a Canon Rebel user; although Canon's lenses were my reason from switching from Pentax to Canon in 1995, this lens is the one thing I missed when I switched back to Pentax in 2015 - then I discovered there is a K-mount version also! I posted a couple of images from the Pentax version the last time someone asked a question like this.
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-446161-1.html

incidentally, museums were my original reason for getting this lens, but I find myself using it as much for "tight" landscape {such as boardwalk through swamp} situations.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

I have the Tokina 11-20 f2.8. Great lens, you really can't go wrong with.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

About the lens brands you named, I used to study the lens tests published in Popular Photography extensively. In those tests, Sigma and Tokina tested very, very well for resolution, contrast, sharpness, etc. So I bought a few as well as their Nikon counterparts and did my own "fairly extensive" tests. My Sigma 28-200mm f3.5 gave me results nearly identical to the Nikon 28-200mm f3.5D. I have a Sigma 17-35mm f2.8-4 and a Nikon 18-35mm f3.5-4.5 that tested so similar that I wouldn't say there is a nickel's worth of difference in resolution between them. These are lenses I've had and used for years so I can vouch for durability in all of them. On the "super wide" end that you seem interested in, I have a Sigma 12-24mm f4.5-5.6 that does a good job with not enough distortion for me to rag-on about.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

For a Dx camera, while it isn't as wide as you wanted, the Sigma 17-35 is an ass kicking great lens.

Mondolinni Loc: Long Island, New York

Thank Much for the reply's Hog's. Food for thought.
Looks like a Good Choice either way IMHO.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Mondolinni wrote:

Hey Folks, br Looking to purchase an ultra-wide le... (show quote)

Not so fast there Mondolinni. You CAN get a Nikon 10-20 at a very reasonable price. Here you go, https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1341603-REG/nikon_20067_af_p_dx_nikkor_10_20mm.html?sts=pi

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

There is nothing wrong with 3rd party lenses. They often outperform OEM lenses at a much lower price, especially the Sigma Art series. I suggest you check sites like lenstip.com and photozone.de for objective reviews that quantify such factors as sharpness, AF speed and accuracy, various types of aberrations, vignetting, flare, etc. I would avoid sites like Ken Rockwell, who is long on emotion and short on objective measurements.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

kymarto wrote:

There is nothing wrong with 3rd party lenses. They often outperform OEM lenses at a much lower price, especially the Sigma Art series. I suggest you check sites like lenstip.com and photozone.de for objective reviews that quantify such factors as sharpness, AF speed and accuracy, various types of aberrations, vignetting, flare, etc. I would avoid sites like Ken Rockwell, who is long on emotion and short on objective measurements.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

kymarto wrote:

There is nothing wrong with 3rd party lenses. They often outperform OEM lenses at a much lower price, especially the Sigma Art series. I suggest you check sites like lenstip.com and photozone.de for objective reviews that quantify such factors as sharpness, AF speed and accuracy, various types of aberrations, vignetting, flare, etc. I would avoid sites like Ken Rockwell, who is long on emotion and short on objective measurements.

So your throwing Zeiss into the OME equation , interesting.

ronichas Loc: Long Island

One of the guys I know who works for B & H, recommended the Rokinon lenses. They are manual lenses but are very reasonably priced. I have 2, I have the Rokinon 14 mm f2.8 for my Nikon and the Rokinon 8mm f2.8 fisheye for my Sony.
Very happy with the results.

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

billnikon wrote:

Not so fast there Mondolinni. You CAN get a Nikon 10-20 at a very reasonable price. Here you go, https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1341603-REG/nikon_20067_af_p_dx_nikkor_10_20mm.html?sts=pi

Thank you for pointing that lens out. For a DX user that is a reasonable priced lens. Good find.

brent46 Loc: Grand Island, NY

Not as wide as you want but I am happy wit the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS EX lens on a D7100.

mikeroetex Loc: Lafayette, LA

jccash wrote:

Thank you for pointing that lens out. For a DX user that is a reasonable priced lens. Good find.

Yeah, but for $50 more, you can buy a lightly used Tokina 11-16 f2.8, a much faster lens. I use mine all the time for night skies and love it!
I also like that it has a clutch method to switch from auto focus to manual, a great benefit when using Live View and not having to find a tiny lever in dim light or in the dark!