looking to buy my 1st wide-angle lens

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

06/26/2005 08:57:13 AM · #1

i'm a newbie in photography so was hoping to get suggestions from more
experienced people here. i own a nikon d70 and been thinking of getting
a good wide-angle lens to take landscapes. hope you can help. thanks.

d

ralph

Nikon Z9

06/26/2005 09:04:33 AM · #2

whats your price range ?

DanSig

06/26/2005 09:04:38 AM · #3

the canon 17-40L is one of the best.. you'll just have to buy a new camera to :)

awpollard

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

06/26/2005 09:08:28 AM · #4

I have the canon mount of this Tamron SP 17-35mm 2.8-4 and have no complaints about sharpness, details and shooting in low light... Lots of bang for the buck with this one...

ergates

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

06/26/2005 10:08:33 AM · #5

Originally posted by iceman:

The Tokina 12-24 or the Sigma 12-24 will get you as wide as it gets
(until the Sigma 10-20 and Tamron 11-18 comes out later this summer) within a reasonable budget. There is also the (probably very nice) Nikon 12-24 which is more expensive.

I resently got the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 which is very very nice and very reasonably priced if you don't intend to go that wide (this lens overlaps with the kit lens, but with constant f2.8 and accoring to many reviews it is much sharper).

Hope this helps,
HÃ¥kon

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

06/27/2005 12:21:17 PM · #6

I'd recommend the Tokina 12-24, very wide, better optically than the Nikon 12-24 and about half the price.

Beagleboy

Canon EOS-30D

06/27/2005 12:40:47 PM · #7

Don't forget to consider the Canon or Sigma 15mm fisheye lenses. They don't look too fishy on a 1.6x crop factor DSLR. Plus, you can use this technique with PanoTools to get rid of unwanted curvatures.

This lens will give you even a wider field of view than the 10 to 12 mm zooms just mentioned.

petrakka

06/27/2005 12:53:45 PM · #8

or you could get the nikon 10.5 mm fisheye, and with nikon capture you can turn it into a rectilinear super wide angle. It's definitely my favorite lens, 2 in one kinda. and ...u can just snag a serial # for capture floating around on the internet and install it through your picture project cd. (but im not sayin u should)

crank2o

06/27/2005 03:30:45 PM · #9

I just got the Tokina 12-24 a couple days ago and am absolutely in love.
There is not a single bad review for the Tokina that I was able to find on the web, and that is what compelled me to get it.
I have found it to be sharp, excellent in low light, well built, and really really freakin' fun at the widest angle.
On a camera that has a 1.6X (or 1.5X for the D70) crop factor, the difference between something that starts at 12mm and something that starts at 17mm is very noticeable.
The lens is also cheaper than its competitors. Depending on how wide you want to go, I would highly recommend it.

Pedro

Nikon D200

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

06/27/2005 03:49:55 PM · #10

Originally posted by yido:

I'd recommend the Tokina 12-24, very wide, better optically than the Nikon 12-24 and about half the price.

Optically better? says who? I'm not doubting you, I'm interested to know the source. I've got the Nikkor, and love it. it was far better than the Sigma in my own convoluted little test (faster, sharper, and way less CA).

I also have the Nikkor 10.5mm...i never fix the distortion though...that's my favourite part :)

**edit - I haven't looked at the Tokina - it didn't exist when i got mine. That's part of the reason i'm interested in Yido's comments about it's optics.

Message edited by author 2005-06-27 16:07:37.

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

06/27/2005 04:04:49 PM · #11

Take a look at Pedroâ��s work and I think youâ��ll find his judgment reliable. I'll let you know my own evaluation next week. My Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF DX AF-S Autofocus Lens just arrived today. I leave for a three day outing at Mt. Rainier National Park Wednesday and hope to give it a good workout.

I own a few cheaper lenses and have finally learned (slow learner) that you get what you pay for. The next two lenses on my wish list are a Nikon AF VR 70-200mm f/2.8D G-APS ED-I and a Nikon AF Micro 105mm f/2.8 Autofocus.

crank2o

06/27/2005 04:07:14 PM · #12

Originally posted by Pedro:

Originally posted by yido:
I'd recommend the Tokina 12-24, very wide, better optically than the Nikon 12-24 and about half the price.

Optically better? says who? I'm not doubting you, I'm interested to know the source. I've got the Nikkor, and love it. it was far better than the Sigma in my own convoluted little test (faster, sharper, and way less CA).

I also have the Nikkor 10.5mm...i never fix the distortion though...that's my favourite part :)

One of my friend's has the Nikkor 12-24, and based on rough comparisons between his lens and the Tokina, I wouldn't say either of the lenses is optically "better".
The main difference between the two is the price.
Photo.net did a good review of the Tokina here

06/27/2005 06:05:44 PM · #13

Crank2o,
You can check the Popular Photography's review of both of the lenses. They have their SQF tests online.

If you scroll down on the Photo.net review of the Tokina, someone copied and pasted the SQF charts of both the Tokina and the Nikon as well.

Message edited by author 2005-06-27 19:21:14.

rscorp

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

06/27/2005 08:13:24 PM · #14

I read some reviews about the Tokina and read that it was every bit the equal of the Nikon, just half the price. Last week my wife suprised me with it and it arrived today. Wasn't able to do much with it today other than shoot in the yard but I'm pretty thrilled.

Unless you are die-hard loyal to Nikon, save yourself the $500. I got it from B&H. Very pleased so far.

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

06/27/2005 08:23:54 PM · #15

Yido - I went to Popular Photograhphy online and only found reviews of the Tokina and the Nikon 17-35, not the 12-24. I think someone may have gotten them mixed up and that is what they posted on Photo.net. PP does say that the Nikon 17-35 has some distortion but as far as I cna find did not post a review of the 12-24. If you find it put up the link as I would be interested in looking it over.

BTW - the Tokina looks like a very good lens for the money and I'm sure a person would not go wrong with it. But I would like to see an apples to apples comparision of the Nikon and Tokina 12-24.

06/27/2005 09:15:27 PM · #16

Sorry folks, while the Tokina 12-24 is available online, the Nikon's 12-24 from 1/05 is not online. However, Pop. Photo does say that the Tokina's optics are "unsurpassed" by Sigma or Nikon in the Tokina's test.

I belive the ratings from the photo.net's forum comparing the Tokina vs. Nikon's SQF rating is accurate.

Message edited by author 2005-06-27 21:18:03.

iceman

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

07/01/2005 12:30:18 AM · #17

so now im down to either the tokina 12-24 or nikon 12-24...and the only
difference is the price?

is it also worth getting a separate fisheye one such as nikon 8 or 10.5?

Gringo

Nikon D2X

07/01/2005 12:52:05 AM · #18

Originally posted by iceman:

so now im down to either the tokina 12-24 or nikon 12-24...and the only
difference is the price?

is it also worth getting a separate fisheye one such as nikon 8 or 10.5?

------------------------------------

The Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF DX AF-S is awesome!

The fisheye 10.5 is so wide, I have trouble keeping my shoes out of the picture. Do you really need 8?

07/01/2005 11:09:30 AM · #19

I'd consider an 8mm fisheye lens as a specialty lens or novelty lens as you have to "defish" in the computer or otherwise, it looks like you are looking through a keyhole on your door. Even if you defish, the things in the periphery get quite a bit of distortion. You should look at Bob Atkins site and see what a defished 8mm fisheye image looks like.
Unless you want that fisheye look for effect, I wouldn't recommend it.

rscorp

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

07/01/2005 11:17:55 AM · #20

I've done a bit more testing with the Tokina now, though nothing worth posting. I'm very happy with the image quality so far.

Though I read some people talking about bad CA with the Tokina, on high contrast areas on my photos, there so far is little to none. What is there is not bad at all, so I'm pretty pleased.

Sharpness is good throughout the range, but on the extreme ends of the focal length, especially 12mm it helps to stop down a bit away from F/4.

The lens is a bit heavey compared to the others but I don't mind. The one minor complaint I have is the filter ring. It is made of plastic. So if you buy this lens, be extremely careful when attaching filters so you don't accidentally re-thread the plastic.

Other than that, for $500 this is one great lens. I haven't seen anything from reviews yet that justifies another $500 for the Nikon.

iceman