doclrb

Dear Hoggers,

I’m seeking advice regarding a landscape lens purchase decision to add to my D500 and backup D7000. I have read numerous comparison reports and reviews: some help, some do not.

So, I’m thinking that I have narrowed my choice down to a Nikon 10-24 f/3.5-4.5 from KEH or a new Tokina AT-X 11-20 f/2.8 Pro DX. THe Tamron 10-24 f/3.5-4.5 Di II VC HLD was originally in the lead until I read a review critical of its autofocus speed and noise level.

I would appreciate advice from current or past users of any of these lenses or any alternatives I have overlooked. Other suggestions are welcome.

Many Thanx

doclrb

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

I have the Sigma 10-20mm and my wife and I both love it. Very flat focus plane with little fringing. I think you should check that one out too.

Andy

doclrb

Thanks. Will consider it as well.

doclrb

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Look at the Tamron 10-24mm VC as well, very nice lens!

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Have you considered a prime lens or only zooms? The Rokinon SP 14mm f/2.4 Lens for Nikon F might be a good choice.
Or the Nikon AF NIKKOR 14mm f/2.8D ED .

Charlie'smom

I have the Nikon 10-20mm and am quite happy with it.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

If you do not NEED a 2.8 aperture, I like the large range and good speed of the Tokina 12-28mm f4. If you need really good IQ, I like the Samyang 16mm f2 manual focus or the Irix 15mm f2.4 manual full frame lens. For the ultimate in IQ, I would suggest doing multifame pano in the portrait orientation using a 24mm manual lens like 24 f2 or 2.8 Nikkors.

..

Ozzie2154 Loc: New Jersey

I'm real happy with my Tamron 10-24. All pictures are sharp and crisp.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

IMHO it’s hard to beat Nikkor lenses for Nikon bodies but I do not have any experience with any of those lenses so that’s all I can say.

I would like to know what are your expectations for this wide lens? What are you looking for in a lens? What are your requirements?

Bill_de Loc: US

There are a lot of good choices from Nikon and others. I have had the Nikkor 12-24 F/4.0 for quite a while and have no complaints. It has been around a while and has gotten pretty good reviews. It is one of the few Gold Band DX lenses, although I'm not sure of the real significance of that.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-dx-zoom-nikkor-12-24mm-f%252f4g-if-ed.html

--

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You may want to consider what kind of landscape photography you are hoping to do with the new lens. One thing that might help would be to visit a fine art museum and look at the landscape masters - paying particular attention to the perspective of their paintings and watercolors. Do they appear as if they were viewed with an ultrawide perspective? Or do they appear natural without extension and volume deformation distortion?

If you are looking to do ultrawide-style photography then any of the three above lenses will provide what you are looking for. But if are looking for more natural landscapes, take a look here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gene_lugo/albums/72157687713807602

These are all stitched panoramas, mostly taken with relatively long focal lengths - from 45mm to 150mm on a full frame camera. Some are hand-held.

Ultrawides are interesting for impact and deliberate distortion of foreground objects - making them large and sometimes overpowering - relative to the other elements in the scene. But I am not a fan of that kind of landscape. I much prefer a more "classic" look. If you need to do some ultrawide, then you need a lens. If you want to take in ultrawide scenes, but desire fewer distortions and a more natural look, and far more detail, then you probably already have what you need.

https://petapixel.com/2016/10/27/stitching-panorama-forget-wide-angle-lens-home/

wrangler5 Loc: Missouri

Re: the Tamron 10-24 the OP liked, I'm not a landscape photographer so I have to ask - why are autofocus speed and (I assume focusing) noise critical factors if the image qualities are sufficient for the price?

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

10 - 20s or 10 - 24's are too wide for usable landscapes, particularly on a crop sensor camera with 16 or 20 Mp camera, unless you only want the "big picture" image. You're better off with the Nikkor 16-35 or the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. Both of these will get you the wide angle landscape and the ability to zoom in for a more detailed shot. The Sigma, at f/1.8 is also a killer performer in low light.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

You want a lens for landscape photography but you seem more concerned with autofocus speed. Not only would autofocus speed be my least concern, it probably wouldn't be on my list. Go for what ever lens you can afford that has the best optics. When I'm doing landscape photography the camera is usually on a tripod and the autofocus is turned off.

hammond

Yeah, I have this one too and love it - great lens for the price.
Actually, great lens period.

I also have a Nikkor 8-15mm Fisheye... captures even more of the landscape, but yeah, it's got that distorted fisheye look (which is kind of the point of the lens, but perhaps get a wide-angle like the Sigma mentioned above first).