Nikon's 14-24 and Sigma's 12-24 are very expensive. The reason for this is that they are ultra-wides designed with a full frame image circle difficult, and expensive, to engineer
If you intend, at some time, to move to a full-frame body, all well and good. If not, their optical performance is overkill for your requirements.
My recommendation remains the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 - I'd be surprised if you were disappointed. From memory, the Nikon 10-20 needs a body later than the D7200 for the image stabilisation to work. However, the need for IS on such a wide angle is debatable.
I have experience with the Sigma 10-20 on a D500 and, IMO, it is fine. For more serious landscape work I use Nikon's 16-35 on full frame - it's a marmite lens with a lot of barrel distortion at 16mm and I'm anticipating a lot of flak on this thread for my choice! Each to his own.