[panicos81]

Hey guys, need assistance (again)
Camera used, Nikon d5100
i need a wide angle lens mostly for landscape and urban pictures. i limited my options down to three lenses

Nikon 10-24mm f3.5-4.5
Tokina 11-16 f2.8
sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6

Things to take into consideration, i will most probably use the lower mm 10,11 or 8 respectively. i care about sharpness, colors, distortion. dont care about flares or vignetting (although it would be better without either).
Please also dont take price into consideration unless the performance is equal.

Thank you in advance,

P.S 1. Rodi please chime in since you seem to be the expert on Nikon..
P.S 2. other lens is a 35mm F1.8, dont need a big zoom lens though.

[khaye1]

Tokina gets my vote...the speed alone on that lens will trump any lens for the money

edit: and 11 is plenty wide for a crop body.....aaaaah sorry, forgot about Nikon AF

[mr_milo]

Originally Posted by khaye1

Tokina gets my vote...the speed alone on that lens will trump any lens for the money

edit: and 11 is plenty wide for a crop body

+1 Here.

I have the Tokina 11-16 and using it with my D90. It's a great lens which is capable of some very low light shots.

Edit: Oops, I just realized you want to use it with a D5100. I don't think the D5100 has a focus motor on it. If that's true then you won't have autofocus with the Tokina. It needs a screw drive to focus. (Or you can manually focus)

[flyingfortress]

i just went through this whole thing on the same body and same subject matter (although dark photography is a big part of what i do)...

i ended up with a sigma 10-20mm. i know there are quality control issues with them, but i was able to try three and pick the best one. and it's sharp as i can image an wide gets - very comparable to the kit lens (18-55) in terms of sharpness/color.

my first choice after doing the research was the tokina 12-24mm but i wasn't able to try one first and wasn't comfortable ordering online without trying it.

i tried the 10-24mm nikon and wasn't impressed with the cost over the others. i thought it was worse than the sigma i ended up with in terms of sharpness.
the sigma 8-16 was very sharp and i liked it, i just didn't want to go with it since i do use the 20mm side of things.

apparently the tokina 11-16 is the end all be all right above the nikon 12-24, but it wont focus on our cameras automatically. a lot of people said that doesn't matter much with wide angles, but it still was an issue for me.

hope that helps? i know it doesn't. i read 20,000 reviews on each lens and was still completely lost. take your body to a camera shop with a card in it and try any lens you can, then go home and look at them on your computer. good luck!

[panicos81]

Originally Posted by flyingfortress

i just went through this whole thing on the same body and same subject matter (although dark photography is a big part of what i do)...

i ended up with a sigma 10-20mm. i know there are quality control issues with them, but i was able to try three and pick the best one. and it's sharp as i can image an wide gets - very comparable to the kit lens (18-55) in terms of sharpness/color.

my first choice after doing the research was the tokina 12-24mm but i wasn't able to try one first and wasn't comfortable ordering online without trying it.

i tried the 10-24mm nikon and wasn't impressed with the cost over the others. i thought it was worse than the sigma i ended up with in terms of sharpness.
the sigma 8-16 was very sharp and i liked it, i just didn't want to go with it since i do use the 20mm side of things.

apparently the tokina 11-16 is the end all be all right above the nikon 12-24, but it wont focus on our cameras automatically. a lot of people said that doesn't matter much with wide angles, but it still was an issue for me.

hope that helps? i know it doesn't. i read 20,000 reviews on each lens and was still completely lost. take your body to a camera shop with a card in it and try any lens you can, then go home and look at them on your computer. good luck!

thanks man, i've been reading reviews for the past three days and still cant make up my mind. manual focus is not a problem.. i use manual focus eve when autofocus is available so no problem..
how was the 8-16? i like the idea of 8mm but my main concern is the bad reviews other sigma lenses have..

i cant try any of them on my camera, no shops have them in Cyprus so my purchase would have to be online and pray for the best!!

[1013mm]

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 would be my choice. I almost jumped on it. I als heard that that the 8-16 is great!

[The1]

auto-focus or not, F2.8 from 11-16 is handy. lets say you shoot 100 pictures all at varrying focal lengths, and you shoot them all at 2.8 or 3.2. when it comes to the post processing, you're not going to have to adjust your exposures as much as if you had a lens that didn't have a consistent F stop.

I find this a huge benefit, even if i don't shoot wide open very often< i just know that it's not going to change on me when i'm concentrating on something else and want a little more zoom.

Constant aperture openings will always win for me.

that being said, I'm on a Canon, so you can discount my opinion. But the same characteristics carry over to all companies when it comes to this subject.

[scollins]

Nikon 14-24 and done.......





Budget-buster more than likely though.....

I like constant aperture zooms, so if I was looking at a more limited budget, I'd probably look at the 12-24 f4: http://bythom.com/1224lens.htm

[skinrock]

Originally Posted by scollins

Nikon 14-24 and done.......

Except that's an FX lens, which would effectively be 21mm on his body.

edit: I always get that mixed up, the DX lens would still be be affected by the crop factor. I always think DX lenses on a DX body are rated for the FX equivalent.

[scollins]

Originally Posted by skinrock

Except that's an FX lens, which would effectively be 21mm on his body.

Psssshhhhh, details details.

But even a 12mm DX lens will be an 18mm equivalent.

[skinrock]

Originally Posted by scollins

Psssshhhhh, details details.

But even a 12mm DX lens will be an 18mm equivalent.

Yea, I just edited my post. Always throws me off. DX is more about the size and cost, because DX on an FX body is too small for the sensor.

[rodi]

i would say the tokina 11-16? if it was me, i'd grab the 14mm f/2.8 - it would be a better investment, long term.
how wide do you really need to be? might as well get the rokinon 8mm and just straighten it in post. ?

[panicos81]

thank you all for your comments,

the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 would be great but the price is too much. i said the price doesnt matter for the three above, this one at $1600 used is a bit too much.

rodi i have considered the rokinon 8mm and then straighten it but the procedure its kind of difficult and the results not gret, you have to crop some part of the pic i think so no good. i´m considering this lens for the fisheye effect though as it is inexpensive a has great reviews.

[TL]

For DX body I went with the Tokina 11-16mm. It's comparable to the Nikon 14-24 but at half the cost.

[Jon D]

Sigma 8-16 for me, good review here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...&cat=37&page=3

[Chewy734]

even though I'm not a Nikon owner, I have friends who are. I would listen to rodi and Tim's suggestions.

[panicos81]

thank you all for your suggestions,

decision made, i will stick with mt 35mm f1.8 for know, learn the camera a bit since its new, save up, and santa will bring me a Nikon 14-24 f2,8

[mr_milo]

That's probably a good move! I bought the Tokina 11-16 but found it's a special use type of lens. I use my 18-200mm much more often and am now looking for either a 35mm f1.8 or a 50mm f1.8 for low light but I can't quite decide.

Enjoy!

[panicos81]

Originally Posted by mr_milo

That's probably a good move! I bought the Tokina 11-16 but found it's a special use type of lens. I use my 18-200mm much more often and am now looking for either a 35mm f1.8 or a 50mm f1.8 for low light but I can't quite decide.

Enjoy!

very happy with my 35mm f1.8.. sharp, fast. i only have it for a week though so still exploring it.

[Inspired]

Originally Posted by panicos81

very happy with my 35mm f1.8.. sharp, fast. i only have it for a week though so still exploring it.

That is no where close to Wide angle. I have one and I only use it for low light situation.

I have the 12-24MM. But I am planning to sell it for a 24-70 and upgrade to a FX.

Here are some pics I got..

[scollins]

Yikes, that is some distortion on the right side! That lamp post looks crazy!

[dryicerx]

I have the sigma 8-16mm and it's scary wide and pretty sharp as well when stopped down a notch. In the wide end, even 1mm makes a huge difference, so that was my reasoning for going with that instead of the other ultra wides. My only complaint is the aperture which I think is a bit too limited, but then again that's asking for too much at that focal length and pricepoint.

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=451984 has a video and photos I made with the Sigma 8-16mm lens (the front element and overall lens survived countless bugs splatters, slight rain and moisture like a champ... even though it wasn't made for that).