DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Please recommend wide zoom for car photography...
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 12 of 12, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 09/25/2011 05:32:24 PM · #1
Hi! I have NIKON D90 and D7000 (both amateur DSLRs). I have already 18-105 VR, 55-300 VR and 35/1.8 lenses. I want to purchase wide zoom. I have read some tests, but find difficult to choose the best wide zoom for car photography - mostly static shots, outside (not in studio), daytime.

I am thinking about one of those:

Tokina 11-16 (I am little afraid of "fish eye" effect)
Tokina 12-24 PRO II (new revised model)
Sigma 10-20 (new revised model)
Sigma 17-35
Sigma 12-24
Tamron 11-18

From your experience, which would be best (for car photography)?

Thanks for recommendation!

H.
 09/25/2011 05:47:53 PM · #2
Hi,
I have the Tokina Pro DX 12-24mm f/4. Super lens. The Sigma 10-20mm is also fabulous.
If you have the money the Nikkor 12-24 is superb too.
In the right hands all of them will be more than up to the task.
All of them have distortion but with correct POV, Composition, Technique or Post Processing you can sort out most if not all the distortion.
6.5mm

10.5mm

10-22mm


12-24mm
Tokina

Sigma

09/25/2011 05:51:18 PM · #3
Have a look at this challenge for some ideas, lenses used and inspiration.
Automobile II
 09/25/2011 06:00:10 PM · #4
Thanks for samples!

>I have the Tokina Pro DX 12-24mm f/4. Super lens. The Sigma 10-20mm is also fabulous.

Yes, but both have some drawbacks (chromatic abberation, coma,...) - read on tests.

>If you have the money the Nikkor 12-24 is superb too.

No money in pocket ;) All of those I have mentioned are enough expensive for me.

>In the right hands all of them will be more than up to the task.

When you see technical specs - all are good, but when you try them.... One have CA, another have big distortion, etc.

>All of them have distortion but with correct POV, Composition, Technique or Post >Processing you can sort out most if not all the distortion.

I am not so skilled with post-processing, I don't use PS, GIMP, etc. Lack of time to learn those software.

I had dx0 software for lens correction - correction of distortion was very harmful, time-consuming and the result was not satisfied.

What you mean with POV?

H.
09/25/2011 06:34:14 PM · #5
Originally posted by Halllo:
No money in pocket ;) All of those I have mentioned are enough expensive for me.

I have the Tamron 10-24. $500 new, but they can be found used for a lot less.

09/25/2011 06:35:19 PM · #6
Originally posted by Halllo:
What you mean with POV?

POV= Point Of View. In other words, choosing the right perspective.
 09/25/2011 06:44:25 PM · #7
You can't have your cake and eat it too on a shoestring!
None of the problems you mention such as CA and distortion are major issues imo IF you buy the Tokina 124, 116, or Sigma 10-20mm. Read between the lines on forums.

I can speak for my Tokina 12-24mm. At 1/2 of the retail price of the Nikkor it is superb. I got mine at 1/3rd the price 2nd hand. I get a tiny bit of vignetting in the upper right hand corner but that is due the Ultra Thin Pro UV Filter I have on it AND it's a DX lens on a DX body. CA is almost irrelevant and hardly visible unless you zoom in 200-300% and that depends on the subject and light. It can be removed in PP Post processing in Photo Shop, Lightroom, Aperture etc.
The newer Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is getting huge raves and Tokina can barely keep up with demand. $660-00. It is outselling all the other UWA's on the market, and that should tell you something.

All UWA (Ultra Wide Angle) have distortion. Only from about 24mm and certainly from 28mm will it not be an issue.
I have a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 DG EX on my D80/D90/D300s. Distortion is hardly noticeable. True, it's a full frame on APS-C so effectively it's 42mm-105mm and I get no vignetting but on a D700 the 28mm doesn't noticeably show up distortion either. Or buy a 24-70mm DX f/2.8 and stand a bit further back to get everything in frame.
You can't have UWA without distortion, that is anything below about 24mm. If you buy a cheap kit lens 18mm-55mm you will get both distortion and more pronounced CA. If your budget conscience and want the best save a bit longer and get the best. Simple.

POV = Point of View. Look at the pictures I linked to. The quality of those images are in most part the photographer and in part the lens, If you are going to sell stock you must also PP to a degree.

Seek out professional photographers opinions on lenses online.
Thom Hogan, 12-24mm Nikkor f/2.8, 16-85 AF-S DX Nikkor, 18-105mm AFS-S DX Nikkor, 12-24mm Sigma
Scott Kelby, his gear here
Jim Richardson and dozens more.

Message edited by author 2011-09-25 18:59:33.
 09/25/2011 07:01:14 PM · #8
16-85 is not a UWA ;) Nor 18-105 VR which I have got already.

Yo_Spiff - nice photos, all of them are HDRs?

Magnum_za - thank you for explanation. I have read some test (as I have mentioned), but I have headache after those tests :) I will narrow my searches to Tokina 12-24 and Tokina 11-16 and Sigmas 12-24/10-20.

Thanks! So I have to read more tests / comparisions.

H.
09/25/2011 07:58:47 PM · #9
Originally posted by Halllo:
No money in pocket ;) All of those I have mentioned are enough expensive for me.


Renting lenses is not expensive.
 09/25/2011 08:19:40 PM · #10
Originally posted by Halllo:
Yo_Spiff - nice photos, all of them are HDRs?

Thanks. First one (red car, huge engine) is a false HDR, 3 different RAW conversions at different exposure levels merged. Third one (rusting hulk) is a handheld 3 exposure HDR. The other two are just tonemapped a bit.
 09/25/2011 11:34:41 PM · #11
Originally posted by Halllo:
16-85 is not a UWA ;) Nor 18-105 VR which I have got already.

H.


Don't discount Steve's Tamron either, especially if you can get a good 2nd hand one.

Yes I am aware that 18mm to 105mm whatever is not technically an UWA lens BUT the 18mm end of it is to some WA enough. 18mm is effectively 24mm on DX and I highlighted them as they will resolve "some" of your hang-up over distortion. i.e. they will not be as distorted as a 10mm. The links are there to show you a pro photographers findings of those type of zooms. The greater the zoom ratio (105mm/18mm = 5.833x) the more that is going on inside the lens, and thus the greater the amount of issues that need correction to get the light to return to exactly the correct spot after passing though 17 elements or more. What I am saying is stay away from large zoom ratio lenses if your concern is quality. Discounting cost as a criterion: Would a wildlife photographer prefer a 600mm f/4 prime or a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 zoomed to 300mm with a 2x TC (Tele-Converter) to get to 600mm albeit at f/10? Also the smaller the aperture at time of shot, the less the effect CA will have on your image. CA is most apparent at low f-stops, near the corners of the image and in areas with high contrast detail.

alohadave also points out a decent option. If in doubt, rent one of each (11-16, 10-20, 10-24, 12-24) and take all of them to your next shoot and take the same picture with each lens. The lensrental company would probably let you try each one out at the shop, of the buildings outside or a car in the street. Then choose the one you think you would buy and rent it for a day. At f/8 or f/10 you will most likely find the sweet spot. You probably wont be disappointed with any one of these.

Go out and take some shots instead of getting bogged down in conflicting forum reviews. (Such as mine!) If you don't like the lens you bought what have you lost? If 2nd hand, only a few dollars by re-selling it and trying another brand?

This is not my best HDR but it's an example of what my Tokina 12-24 f/4 Pro DX version I did with the dreaded flare issue. I read online that it had terrible flare. So much so that many refused to buy it because of what I now believe is an unjust labelling of that lens. The Pro DX II version of the 12-24mm is supposed to be better at flare control due a better lens coating on ONE lens ONLY. The design,glass elements and so forth are IDENTICAL to the Pro DX I but it has an internal focus motor where version I with the F mount didn't. The Canon models of I and II both had internal motors.

I stopped reading amateur lens reviews a long time ago and put more weight on real world results. In this case Flickr is quite beneficial...although some work may be dubious you can soon spot the good work from the poor.
Tokina AT-X AF Pro DX 12-24 f/4
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
Nikkor 12-24mm f/4
Sigma 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6
Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di-II LD SP

Message edited by author 2011-09-26 05:56:41.
 06/24/2012 06:10:28 PM · #12
A few shots from today at the annual Flint Sloan Fair. Nikon D700 w/ Niikor 17-35 f/2.8

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 12:40:16 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 12:40:16 PM EDT.