Ultra Wide Lens Dilemma
Mar 2, 2018 08:12:26 #
I have the 10-20 AF-P, which I use with my D500 and it is one of my favorite lenses. I have been very pleased with the sharpness and resultant images. It is very lightweight and is certainly not of the build quality of some other wide angle lenses, but IMHO it is a great value given the price. Several have said that VR is not important for a wide angle and generally that is true. However, I was recently shooting inside an arboretum and to get some of my shots, I had to shoot one-handed and off balance and the VR certainly helped.
Mar 2, 2018 08:25:01 #
Digger369 wrote:
I want to add an ultra wide to my existing lenses ... (show quote)
What subjects will you be shooting that you think will be enhanced with an ultra wide?
Mar 2, 2018 08:28:42 #
Grandkids' events indoors, both photos and video, home interiors, and landscapes.
Note to all: Wow, this was my first time posting a question and I hadn't expected such quick and outstanding answers. Thanks to all.
Note to all: Wow, this was my first time posting a question and I hadn't expected such quick and outstanding answers. Thanks to all.
Mar 2, 2018 11:37:43 #
Mar 2, 2018 12:13:42 #
One thing about the Tokina 11-20 lens is that it is an f2.8. The fastest of the Nikons, unless you go to an AF-S lens, is f3.5. You may never need the speed but it sure comes in handy when you do especially for interior shooting.
Mar 2, 2018 12:18:58 #
My mistake I have a Tokina 11-20mm f2.8. I use to have an older 12-24 and sold it. Numbers confuse me.
Mar 2, 2018 12:34:28 #
bpulv
Loc: Buena Park, CA
Digger369 wrote:
I want to add an ultra wide to my existing lenses ... (show quote)
I have a 10-24 DX lens that I bought for my D90 when it first came on the market. I now use it on my D800 because it is so much lighter and smaller than the 14mm FX lens, which has a similar angle of view. When I travel, it is the most used lens in my bag. It is indispensable for both landscapes and building interiors.
Mar 2, 2018 14:11:37 #
JDawson
Loc: Boise, Idaho
I had the same dilemma about a year ago and after a ton of research I went with the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC USD. I've been very happy with it, but I'm going to sell it. I just don't need a $1200 ultra-wide.
John
John
Mar 2, 2018 14:18:18 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
The AF-P 10-20mm Nikkor is a bargain lens at just over $300... if you can make it work on your camera (https://www.nikonimgsupport.com/eu/BV_article?articleNo=000035705&configured=1&lang=en_GB). It is one of the few ultrawides with image stabilization (which may not be all that big a deal on an ultrawide... short focal lengths are pretty easily handheld, after all).
The Nikkor AF-S 10-24mm and AF-S 12-24mm are very good, but vastly overpriced. They are the most expensive ultrawides on the market, by a wide margin.
The Tokina AT-X 12-28mm f/4 DX and AT-X 11-20mm f/2.8 DX are much more affordable and darned nice lenses. These are the "latest and greatest" and improved on earlier versions (below). The 11-20mm has gotten a lot bigger and heavier, now uses an 82mm filter.
Older Tokina 12-24mm f/4 and 11-16mm f/2.8 came in two versions. In Nikon mount the first version of them is "motorless"... that's okay on D7100 or D500 (but those lenses will not be able to autofocus on D3000-series and D5000-series, among others). The "II" versions of both those lenses are little different, EXCEPT that in Nikon mount they had the in-lens focus motor added. 11-16mm is sharp... but extremely prone to flare and has a very limited range of focal lengths. 12-24mm is almost as sharp, much less susceptible to flare, but can show some chromatic aberration. The newer models (11-20mm and 12-28mm above) that superseded them address a lot of the short-comings of the first two versions.
All Tokina use a "focus clutch" mechanism and those with in-lens motors use a micro motor. Not the fastest... but not really a problem with an ultrawide which doesn't have to move the focus group very far anyway. The focus clutch arrangement makes it impossible to do "manual override" of AF... you have to first shift the lens into MF mode (slide the focus ring). When set to AF, the focus ring is disengaged and does nothing (a protection for micro motor type focus drives). Otherwise, Tokina are well made, nice lenses. Tokina lenses use the same DX and FX designations as Nikon... they also rotate their focus and zoom rings the same direction as Nikkors (opposite Canon and some others).
Only you can say whether you need f/2.8 on an ultrawide or not. Most people don't... we generally are stopping those types of lenses down, not using them anywhere near that large an aperture. But if you do a lot of night photography or photojournalism or sports... it might be useful.
Tamron 10-24mm in the latest version is the only other ultrawide available for use on Nikon that has image stabilization (VC). It's also relatively affordable and replaced and earlier model that lacked VC.
Sigma offers a 10-20mm f/3.5 that's fairly big and heavy, but has come way, way down in price. They used to offer a smaller, lighter 10-20mm with a variable aperture, but that's been discontinued so can only be found used now.
Sigma also offers an 8-16mm... the widest of the ultrawides. It goes where no other lens can, but has fairly strong wide angle distortions and a protruding/convex front element prevents using standard filters on it.
They also have a 12-24mm... but it's actually a full frame (FX) lens and would work out to be very expensive just to use it on a DX camera. There are DX lens options ("DC" in Sigma, "Di II" in Tamron, "DX" in Tokina) that are a lot smaller, lighter and considerably less expensive. The Sigma 12-24mm also has a protruding, convex front element that precludes using standard filters on it.
The Nikkor AF-S 10-24mm and AF-S 12-24mm are very good, but vastly overpriced. They are the most expensive ultrawides on the market, by a wide margin.
The Tokina AT-X 12-28mm f/4 DX and AT-X 11-20mm f/2.8 DX are much more affordable and darned nice lenses. These are the "latest and greatest" and improved on earlier versions (below). The 11-20mm has gotten a lot bigger and heavier, now uses an 82mm filter.
Older Tokina 12-24mm f/4 and 11-16mm f/2.8 came in two versions. In Nikon mount the first version of them is "motorless"... that's okay on D7100 or D500 (but those lenses will not be able to autofocus on D3000-series and D5000-series, among others). The "II" versions of both those lenses are little different, EXCEPT that in Nikon mount they had the in-lens focus motor added. 11-16mm is sharp... but extremely prone to flare and has a very limited range of focal lengths. 12-24mm is almost as sharp, much less susceptible to flare, but can show some chromatic aberration. The newer models (11-20mm and 12-28mm above) that superseded them address a lot of the short-comings of the first two versions.
All Tokina use a "focus clutch" mechanism and those with in-lens motors use a micro motor. Not the fastest... but not really a problem with an ultrawide which doesn't have to move the focus group very far anyway. The focus clutch arrangement makes it impossible to do "manual override" of AF... you have to first shift the lens into MF mode (slide the focus ring). When set to AF, the focus ring is disengaged and does nothing (a protection for micro motor type focus drives). Otherwise, Tokina are well made, nice lenses. Tokina lenses use the same DX and FX designations as Nikon... they also rotate their focus and zoom rings the same direction as Nikkors (opposite Canon and some others).
Only you can say whether you need f/2.8 on an ultrawide or not. Most people don't... we generally are stopping those types of lenses down, not using them anywhere near that large an aperture. But if you do a lot of night photography or photojournalism or sports... it might be useful.
Tamron 10-24mm in the latest version is the only other ultrawide available for use on Nikon that has image stabilization (VC). It's also relatively affordable and replaced and earlier model that lacked VC.
Sigma offers a 10-20mm f/3.5 that's fairly big and heavy, but has come way, way down in price. They used to offer a smaller, lighter 10-20mm with a variable aperture, but that's been discontinued so can only be found used now.
Sigma also offers an 8-16mm... the widest of the ultrawides. It goes where no other lens can, but has fairly strong wide angle distortions and a protruding/convex front element prevents using standard filters on it.
They also have a 12-24mm... but it's actually a full frame (FX) lens and would work out to be very expensive just to use it on a DX camera. There are DX lens options ("DC" in Sigma, "Di II" in Tamron, "DX" in Tokina) that are a lot smaller, lighter and considerably less expensive. The Sigma 12-24mm also has a protruding, convex front element that precludes using standard filters on it.
Mar 2, 2018 15:31:31 #
I often found that I used the 24mm end of my 10-24mm more than the wider end. You might also consider the new Tamron 10-24mm.
Mar 3, 2018 06:27:06 #
I just got the
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro DX II Digital Zoom Lens and I'm very happy with it. Good price, great quality and fine results.
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro DX II Digital Zoom Lens and I'm very happy with it. Good price, great quality and fine results.
Mar 3, 2018 07:56:33 #
Digger369 wrote:
I want to add an ultra wide to my existing lenses ... (show quote)
I have a 10-24 DX Nikkor lens... I like it but it isn't as wide as you might think/hope. This is primairly due to the DX cameras crop which makes the 10mm apear to be about the same as a 15mm on an FX. I have a Nikkor DX 18-70mm zoom that I use more. I'm not saying don't get it but just saying be aware. Personally, I now buy nothing but FX lenses because they can be used on both FX and DX cameras and while on the DX that 10mm is still similar to a 15 but on the FX using an FX lens it is going to give me the true 10mm. NOTE: this is also why I have both an FX and DX camera. I use the FX primarily for wide to normal and the DX for normal to Telephoto. Yes I do use the FX at times for telephoto too but nowhere nearly as much as I do the DX. My cameras are a Nikon D7100 (DX) and a Nikon D610 (FX).
Mar 3, 2018 08:00:10 #
The Nikon 10-20 lens will work with your D7100 but not with many other Nikon bodies. Regarding what lens to buy it all depends on how wide you want to go.
I use the excellent 12-24 f4 AF-S and it has all of the wide angle focal lengths I need. No VR in such a wide lens has not been an issue for me.
I use the excellent 12-24 f4 AF-S and it has all of the wide angle focal lengths I need. No VR in such a wide lens has not been an issue for me.
Mar 3, 2018 08:07:48 #
camerapapi wrote:
The Nikon 10-20 lens will work with your D7100 but not with many other Nikon bodies. Regarding what lens to buy it all depends on how wide you want to go.
I use the excellent 12-24 f4 AF-S and it has all of the wide angle focal lengths I need. No VR in such a wide lens has not been an issue for me.
I use the excellent 12-24 f4 AF-S and it has all of the wide angle focal lengths I need. No VR in such a wide lens has not been an issue for me.
Actually the lens will work with ANY Nikon body. It will just cause the Full Frame (FX) cameras to go into DX mode and only use 2/3rds of their sensor. This is assuming that the camera doesn't need a firmware upgrade.
Mar 3, 2018 09:07:54 #
DaveO wrote:
There were two versions of a couple of them, the 12-24 being one. The AT-X 124 PRO DX II was the one to get, probably around $300 tops used.
There were two versions of a couple of them, the 12-24 being one. The AT-X 124 PRO DX II was the one to get, probably around $300 tops used.How much distortion is there? Particularly vertical lines at the edges?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.