willaim Loc: Sunny Southern California

willaim Loc: Sunny Southern California

Hi, Royce. I have the Sigma 10-20 3.5 and use it on my 80D. I find it to be sharp for landscape and interior shots. The Tokina 8-16 will tend to be slightly fisheye. But whatever you choose, I'm sure you'll be happy with.

SafetySam Loc: Colorado

Royce, I have had the Nikon 10-20mm for a while and use it on my D7200, and found it extremely sharp edge to edge and no vignetting I have seen . . . light weight and very compact . . minimal distortion when you plan your shots, and when there is it's easy to correct in PP . . I would recommend this lens as a "natural fit" for your 7200.

Royce Moss Loc: Irvine, CA

Safety, thanks for your input. I am not a pro just a old guy with a camera having fun. Tired of reading review after review so gonna just go with the Nikon.

SafetySam Loc: Colorado

User ID

Great. Please post your results.
Don't neglect to "store original"!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Actually Tokina doesn't make an 8-16mm... Sigma does. It's the widest non-fisheye DX lens available. But at $649 it's also one of the more expensive ultrawides and it has quite strong wide angle distortions.

The Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 is an excellent lens... very well built with very good image quality, but somewhat large and heavy. It's on sale for $469. Tokina also offers a slightly less wide 12-28mm f/4 that's a bit lower priced at $379 and slightly more compact. You'll probably be stopping the lens down most of the time anyway, so may not ever need f/2.8. Only you can say.

The least expensive is the Nikkor 10-20mm. It's also got VR, while most other ultrawide zooms are not stabilized. If you plan to do a lot of handheld shooting with it, the VR might be handy. If you are going to be using a tripod a lot, may not be needed. This Nikkor is smaller and lighter than those other lenses (less than half their weight, in most cases). But it's also "slower" than most with an f/4.5-5.6 aperture. Still, it's quite capable. And on sale for $277 right now... It's $100 to $380 less expensive than most of the other current options! As an AF-P lenses, the Nikkor 10-20mm will work fine on your D7200 (but wouldn't be fully compatible with some of the earlier DX cameras).

Other current possibilities are...

Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5... $399. A decent lens optically, but also larger and heavier than the Nikkor (similar size/weight as the Tokina 11-20mm).

Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 VC... $500. The only other ultrawide with image stabilization (in addition to the Nikkor 10-20mm). This is a rather recent revision... not sure how it compares optically.

Nikkor AF-S 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 DX... a fine lens that's ridiculously expensive at nearly $900.

Nikkor AF-S 12-24mm f/4 DX... an excellent lens that's even more ridiculously expensive at nearly $1150.

Sigma 12-24mm f/4 "Art"... is actually a full-frame capable lens, which is one of the reasons it's so expensive at $1600. It would be a waste of money, just to use it on a DX camera.

Older, discontinued lenses you may see on the used market include...

Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6... a cheaper, smaller lens than the f/3.5 listed above. It's pretty good optically and decently built.

Tokina 11-16mm and 12-24mm... both excellent lenses optically. The 11-16mm f/2.8 is super sharp. HOWEVER, it also is extremely susceptible to flare. And, to get the larger aperture, you end up with a very narrow range of focal lengths. ALSO... There are two versions of both these lenses. In the Nikon mount, the first version doesn't have a focus motor in the lens. As a result, although fine on D7200, they will not autofocus on some Nikon cameras (incl. all D3000 and D5000 series). The "II" versions of these two lenses in Nikon mount DO have an in-lens focus drive motor, so are able to autofocus on most Nikon cameras. Aside from the added focus motor (Nikon version only), there doesn't seem to be much difference between the original and II versions.

Tamron 10-24mm (non-VC version), has somewhat lower image quality than some of the other lenses listed here. It's most noticeably "soft" toward the 24mm end of the zoom range. Prior to that, there was a Tamron 11-18mm years ago... one of the first ultrawides made for APS-C cameras, but with pretty poor image quality.

rcfees

My information is that there isn't a switch to turn the VC off on the less expensive Nikon lens while using the D7200 unlike the Tamron10-20VC. The Tamron VC also received good reviews on the internet. Probably best way is to rent the lenses your interested and see for yourself.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

Make sure to purchase Used.. Many folks buy either a wide angle and or macro lens but never take the time to learn how to use properly, two of the hardest lens to get great results with. Most folks buy them, let them sit around for several years Unused then sell for a fraction of a new purchase price. This way, if you let your lens sit around for several years Unused, you will not have wasted your money...

Imagemine Loc: St. Louis USA

I own a Nikon 14-24 and very happy with it, listening to the talking heads on YouTube Sigma Art 14-24 f/2.8 is very nice