Nukepr Loc: Citrus County, FL

The Tokina 11-16 2.8 is an excellent lens. Also, if you do not need to go quite as wide, consider the Tokina 14-20 f2. I have owned both lenses, and to my mind the 14-20 is the sharper of the two. After using the 14-20 I sold the 11-16 and now use the 14-20 on my D7200 for the extra width. I recommend renting them both and making your own comparison.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

If Nikon is too expensive and out of your budget look at independent lenses and Tokina comes to mind.
Independent lenses are doing well at a fraction of the OEM.
I use a Nikon 12-24 f4 but I know the Tokina equivalent is a very good optic. If you need wider Tokina has the 11-20 f2.8 that should cover your needs.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Nikkor 10-24mm DX and 12-24mm f/4 DX are both pretty good, but also by far the most expensive lenses of the type... Usually about $900 and over $1100, respectively. Frankly, these days those prices are utterly absurd for DX ultrawide zooms.

The Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 and 12-28mm f/4 DX are as good or in certain ways better, for A LOT less money. If you consider used, the older 11-16mm f/2.8 II model is also very sharp, but prone to flare. The older 12-24mm f/4 II is very good and a lot more resistant to flare, not quite as sharp. The 11-16mm and 12-24mm non-II models in Nikon mount are basically the same optically, but don't have a built in focusing motor. They'll be able to autofocus on a Nikon D7000-series or D500/300... but would be manual focus only on D5000 and D3000-series cameras.

Overall quite nicely made, the Tokina use the same DX designation as Nikon and their lenses' focus and zoom rings rotate the same direction. One difference, most Tokina AF lenses use a unique "focus clutch" mechanism, where the focus ring itself is shifted forward or backward to engage or disengage autofocus. Because of this arrangement, the user cannot instantly override autofocus. When it's engaged in the AF setting, rotating the focus ring doesn't do anything. But unless you use manual override a lot, once accustomed to this minor difference it's a pretty nice and easy to use.

Sigma also offers some good ultrawides... 10-20mm f/3.5 DC is the most commonly found now. It's quite large and heavy (uses 82mm filters, as does the Tokina 11-20mm). There also was a smaller 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 DC, though it's hard to find new now... should be quite a few used. Sigma also makes the widest of the wide non-fisheye lenses... an 8-16mm DC. There's a lot of wide angle distortion with it, though not as much as a fisheye. This lens also cannot be fitted with a standard filter, due to a strong convex, protruding front element. Sigma also offers a 12-24mm, but it's actually a full frame lens ("DG" in Sigma's terminology), rather large, heavy and expensive.

Finally, Tamron has offered a couple different 10-24mm. The original is okay... nothing to write home about, but a nice range of focal lengths in a single lens. I haven't compared the relatively new 10-24mm VC (stabilized) version that's superseded it, so look for online reviews by users (as well as any of the other lenses mentioned).

You may notice that most of these lenses are relatively slow... f/4, f/4.5, f/5, f/5.6 apertures at best are relatively common. The "fastest" are the Tokina 11-20mm and 11-16mm f/2.8 (note the larger size of the former and the very limited range of focal lengths of the latter). The Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 is also relatively "fast" (but big and heavy... also used to be one of the most expensive but the price has been reduced a lot). In truth, for most purposes a fast ultrawide isn't necessary. A tripod and a longer shutter speed might be used in low light conditions. Exceptions might be sports photography/photojournalism, where a faster shutter speed allowed by a larger aperture may be needed to freeze subject movement... or astrophotography where a larger aperture can make for a brighter, easier to use viewfinder.

Finally...

Nikon is now offering an AF-P 10-20mm VR DX (stabilized) that's quite affordable, at just a tad over $300. This lens was introduced last year and no doubt is in response to a similar, sub-$300 ultrawide that Canon introduced a year or two earlier (also causing the third party manufacturers to reduce the prices on many of their UWAs). The new Nikkor seems okay optically, is fairly small, light and plasticky (like the Canon). But you'll need to look for reviews of this lens elsewhere and be certain to check if AF-P lenses will work properly on your D7100... I know they're incompatible with some relatively recent and most or all older Nikon DSLRs. It might be possible to use them on some cameras after a firmware update. There are compatibility charts on the Nikon USA and Nikonians.org websites. Might be some compatibility info at Ken Rockwell's website, too.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I have a Sigma 10-20 for my D7000 and really like it but there can be distortion of verticals if you don't hold it level. You might want to try stitching a pano together with the Nikon 35mm 1.8.

chats005

I have done some research and will purchase the newer Tokina 11- 20mm f2.8 for my Nikon D7200 & D7500.
The price point is very affordable, plus some online lens reviews rate the Tokina as equal to or better than Nikon

TonyBot

My youngest also just moved from the 3300 to the 7200. (I am a Canon guy, but I'll forgive her!) She just got from her husband a lens combo of the 10-20mm and the 40mm micro that was/is on sale. While not their pro-level lenses, she is super satisfied, for what is not a huge amount of money, like their top-level super wide zoom for APS-size sensors is. If you do not expect to do much more than 11x14s and web work and you don't really need to spend the rather large difference, look into it, and if you can, try 'em out. If you've got a camera dealer nearby, great. If it's only a big-box store, it'll be a bit more difficult. (Locally, we have a BestBuy not too far away, and the woman who heads their photo department is a photographer herself, and is quite cooperative and helpful. We also have Hunt's Photo, and I really have to give them a plug!)

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

After reading several reviews as well as watching YouTube videos on different wide angle lenses I got the one that outperform all the others, the Tokina 11-20. Maximum aperture, minimum distortion.

Here’s one review:
https://www.lenstip.com/index.html?test=obiektywu&test_ob=451

One could argue that it is heavy but I decided thtt would not limit me as I find picture quality more important than lens weight.

I got the lens some month ago, bought it used on eBay for less than $400, from a real estate photographer who was changing to full frame equipment.

I have no regrets about my purchase, on the contrary I’m very happy with it.

Boris Ekner Loc: From Sweden, living in Guatemala

Agreed.

ecurb1105

Recommend the Tokina 11-16, but more importantly, a good tripod. Learn to level the camera on tripod for architectural shots.

TonyBot

(At the risk of upsetting Rongo) Amen to that, brother... live view, with grid (measure twice, cut once - - - three or four times). Boy, what a difference a level shot makes!

bobburk3 Loc: Maryland

[quote=rehess]I've had a Sigma 10-20mm for both Canon and Pentax, so I'm guessing its available for Nikon also.

Yes, I have the Sigma 10-20 for my Nikon and love it.