AsiaPaul Loc: Vietnam

Have an itch to scratch and was wondering if anyone has thoughts on the Tamron or Sigma lenses?

CLF Loc: Raleigh, NC

Paul, I bought a Sigma 10-20mm about 7 months ago and love the lens. Very sharp and lite. I own a crop camera and that actually makes it a 16-32mm lens and you need to consider the camera body you are going to use it on. In my case, 16mm is plenty wide enough.

Greg

AsiaPaul Loc: Vietnam

Thx for the reply. I have a D7000 and do a lot of street and travel (landscape) photography

BudsOwl Loc: Upstate NY and New England

I also had a Sigma 10-20. Sold it when I bought my FF since it is for a crop frame. I liked it. The person I sold it to is using it for both landscape and buildings.

Bud

CLF Loc: Raleigh, NC

Paul, I believe the D7000 is also a crop sensor at 1.5 which would make it a 15-30mm lens. I also use mine for street photography and landscapes. I thing you will love it.

Greg

Nikonnorm Loc: East Gwillimbury Ont.

Hi Aisia I have a D7000 and that lens. They work great together.
Love it.
Norm.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

The correct answer will be found in online comparisons. Here's a link to one.

http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=34

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I have the Tamron 10-24 for Nikon and it's okay. I wish I had gotten the Nikon 10-24 which had better reviews. The Tamron is a good lens and I get really good results from about 11mm up but it tends to show a slight fisheye at 10mm. It's nothing that I cant take out using lightroom but why should I have to? Again, I do love the lens for the wide angle of view and it is a DX lens so it would vignette on an FX or would switch the FX to DX mode. This tends to make the lens the rough equivalent of a 15mm-36mm lens but it is still wider than my 18-70 DX or my 50mm 1.4 FX and the Nikon 10-24 is a DX also, so I'm not really giving anything away there.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

I have the Canon 10-22. I really like it for landscapes, urban images, etc.

bejamin Loc: South Texas

I have the sigma 10-20 on my Canon 70D. Love it and it is really sharp.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

I'm in the same boat and also looking at the Tokina 10-20mm f2.8. So far the Tokina looks good but I don't know if I really need the f2.8 as this lens will be used outdoors most of the time and when using it inside I would use a flash anyway.

Al Bruton

I have the Tamron and use it for underwater shooting. Very pleased with results using a D7100 in a Nexus housing

Grandpa Pete Loc: Western Finger Lakes (NY)

I've had the Tokina 12-24 F4 for over five years now and used it with a D90 and now D7100. It has done a great job for me and was much less expensive than the Nikon version. The 12-24 has been extended and the current model is 12-28. Great detail. Check it out as well.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Too bad you are shooting with Nikon, or you'd have some other options: Canon EF-S 10-22mm USM is excellent, though a little pricey... and the newer EF-S 10-18mm IS STM is amazingly good for under $300 US... it's also the only ultrawide to date, that has image stabilization. Plus it's the lightest and most compact of them all. However neither will work on a Nikon DSLR. So, it's a moot point and I'm not sure why some are responding about them above.

I know the Nikon ultrawide DX lenses are excellent, but extremely pricey.

IMO, the best third party ultrawide zooms are Tokina. They currently offer 11-20mm f2.8 and 12-28mm f4, both available for Nikon. In the past, if you consider used, they also offered 11-16/2.8 and 12-24/4. Note that both these latter came in two versions for Nikon: those with a built in motor and slightly cheaper versions without. Your 7000-series camera can use either type, since the camera itself has a built-in AF drive motor. 3000- and 5000-series Nikon don't have that, so would need the lenses with the built-in motor. All four of the Tokina are quite good optically and well built. They also are among the few with non-variable apertures. And, the f2.8 are the fastest ultrawides on the market, might be something a street shooter would want, if you find yourself struggling for adequate light a lot. The f2.8 Tokina are slightly sharper than the f4, but the f4 tend to be a little more flare resistant. Also, the older 11-16/2.8 has one of the narrowest ranges of focal lengths among all the UWA, in order to have the larger aperture. The newer 11-20/2.8 solves that, but has grown larger and heavier.... It uses 82mm filters, for example, versus 77mm on the older lens. The Tokina build and "feel" reminds me of a Canon "L-series" ultrawide that I'd used previously with my film cameras.

Sigma offers several that would be my second choice. There are actually two different Sigma 10-20mm. One is a less expensive and smaller version with variable aperture. The other is a lot more expensive, is bigger and heavier, with a non-variable f3.5 aperture. Once again, 82mm filters on the latter, while the former uses 77mm. These are pretty good an well made lenses. When I tested the variable aperture version, I found it had more flare issues than the Tokina 12-24mm (which I ended up buying at that time). I think all the recent and current versions also have HSM focus drive, which is fast and accurate (similar to Canon USM or Nikon Silent Wave... though to be fair all these ultrawides focus near instantaneously because they only need to move their focusing group a short distance to go all the way from closest focus to infinity... even micro motor Tokina I've used have been quite fast focusing).

Sigma also offers the widest ultrawide available (aside from fisheye lenses).... their 8-16mm. It's quite extreme and goes where no other ultrawide can, but has some fairly strong wide angle distortion effects (though not as strong as a fisheye). Yet another Sigma is their 12-24mm... but it's actually a full frame (FX) capable lens. One of the widest availabe, in fact. And, as such, it's rather expensive and would be a waste of money to buy only to use it on a crop sensor DX camera. Most Sigma lenses seem a little "over built" to me... sturdy, but larger and heavier than they really need to be.

The Tamron 10-24mm would probably be my third choice. At one time it offered the widest range of focal lengths in a single UWA zoom. (Now the Tokina 12-28mm matches it.) It also has a 6-year warranty, I believe. While pretty good, when I tried one I thought it's images got a little soft around the 24mm end of the range. And, it's a bit more "plasticky" feeling than some of the other lenses. OTOH, I don't know that this would translate into any less durability... properly done, engineered plastic isn't necessarily a weakness, might even hold up better than metal parts, while saving some weight.

Really, all of these are pretty close and capable lenses. For your purposes, you might want to look at the f2.8 lenses that Tokina offers... But aside from that and the range of focal lengths offered, differences are fairly minimal and you can shop for the best price.

AsiaPaul Loc: Vietnam

Thank you. I will consider the Tokina. Living in China I may have a harder time finding one. Maybe the camera vendors at the local electronics mall will be able to order one for me.