Full frame wide angles on a budget

Jamie Robin Photo

Jamie Robin Photo

Messages
18
Name
Jamie
Edit My Images
No
Hi everyone

Just looking for some advice.

I'm in the market to get a wide angle lens for my full frame Nikon, any recommendations?

Will need to be used and looking to spend between £300-£400 could push to £500 if needs be.

I would be using the wide angle for car interiors and dramatic exterior shots/rolling shots. Preferably something with minimal distortion although lightroom could probably do a good job correcting this. Not bothered as to whether it is good in low light or not as it'll be tripod mounted and I wouldn't be shooting wide open too often. What lenses do you tend you use for such images?

At the lower end of the budget I have seen the Nikon 18-35mm (D version) getting pretty decent reviews, has anyone used this lens or have some samples as this can be had for around £300!

I have however also been looking at the Nikon 20mm 2.8d and Nikon 24mm 2.8d primes, are these worth a look at? As I have only used wide angle and ultra wide angles on a crop body before so this is new for me as is the world of full frame. Still getting to grips with it!
 
Hi Jamie, I think you'd get more replies if you asked the mods to move this into the talk equipment area :)
 
Cosina 19-35 is pretty good for very little money.

18-35 G is well within budget and very good would avoid the D version it's a bit rubbish.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Cosina 19-35 is pretty good for very little money.

18-35 G is well within budget and very good would avoid the D version it's a bit rubbish.
Click to expand...
I shall check out the cosina aswell then thank you! Also I'll keep an eye out for a decently priced G thank you for that!
 
The Nikon 18-35D is actually ok as long as you're not shooting seascapes or anything with a flat horizon or straight lines as it has some funky distortion at 18mm.


But still, the obvious answer is the G version.
 
Nawty said:
The Nikon 18-35D is actually ok as long as you're not shooting seascapes or anything with a flat horizon or straight lines as it has some funky distortion at 18mm.


But still, the obvious answer is the G version.
Click to expand...
After a quick search the G seems to be ever so slightly over budget. Is there much in the way of IQ to warrant the extra money?
 
Jamie Robin Photo said:
After a quick search the G seems to be ever so slightly over budget. Is there much in the way of IQ to warrant the extra money?
Click to expand...


I've not owned the G so not really placed to comment, I never had an issue with the sharpness of the D on a D700 but if low distortion is a requirement then I would avoid the D.

Sharpness when viewed at 100% depends a lot on how many megapixels you have, on the 12MP D700 pretty much every lens looked sharp at 100%, not so with the D610 I had. However, if you aren't printing or viewing large then this doesn't really matter and there is much more to an image than absolute sharpness.
 
The older Sigma 21-35 is a good lens, and can be had cheaply used - typically £70-£110. I use one with a D610 and it's surprisingly sharp with relatively little distortion. Only hiccup could be whether it's wide enough for you.

Example
Clevedonpier-3561 by Toni Ertl, on Flickr
 
Nawty said:
I've not owned the G so not really placed to comment, I never had an issue with the sharpness of the D on a D700 but if low distortion is a requirement then I would avoid the D.

Sharpness when viewed at 100% depends a lot on how many megapixels you have, on the 12MP D700 pretty much every lens looked sharp at 100%, not so with the D610 I had. However, if you aren't printing or viewing large then this doesn't really matter and there is much more to an image than absolute sharpness.
Click to expand...
It will be used on a d700 as thats what I bought to get into the FX world and I'm really loving it haha!
 
Jamie Robin Photo said:
After a quick search the G seems to be ever so slightly over budget. Is there much in the way of IQ to warrant the extra money?
Click to expand...

Perhaps none around at the right price at the moment but often see used versions going for around the £400 mark they are only £550 new from the grey importers.
 
f/2.8 said:
Perhaps none around at the right price at the moment but often see used versions going for around the £400 mark they are only £550 new from the grey importers.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'll hold out for the moment and wait for one a good used price and condition to come up. Never used a grey importer is there customs charges when it comes in or is that usually included in price?
 
Nikon 20mm 1.8 AFS is a great lens, £400 or so used and I found it better than the older 2.8 version. You do have the Nikon 16-35 f4, great lens but would be £500 used, maybe a tad more so could be out of budget.
 
A 'normal' angle 50mm gives you aprox 45deg FoV. Insde a car you would just about frame half the instrument nacelle on the dash with that, poking it through the head-rest, shooting from the back seat. A 28mm lens gives aprox 75deg FoV... you might get a bit of windscreen above the clocks from the back-seat.... A 20mm lens gives aprox 90deg FoV.. you would still be struggling to get much cabin with one, in a car.

Drop lower, and you are into the realms of UWA's, and still, wide will never be wide-enough!..... and you will be getting edge wobbles, with most lenses, erring much beneath 11/12mm ish.. which can be a bludger to sort in post-process.

SO! It's just a suggestion, but have you thought 'FISH-EYE'? - Accept the wobbles; grab the wide, and if you want to play in post, crop the FoV down there, or de-fish to to taste.. where it is definitely 'fish' not fowl, nor nether nor!

My fish (for DX) is the sigma 4.5; it gives a 180 deg FoV on both axis for a full-round image; Auto-Focus is nie on pointless, with a lens that short offering a DoF almost from the front element to infinity, at most apertures! But F2.8 fastest aperture is pretty useful Its an awkward lens to work with, with the camera angle making a very big difference to the degree of bowing in the image, and 1/3 of the view-finder masked.. but it gets the 'wide' you want, and gives you the chance to sort after.... just takes a bit of alternative working.

That was an expensive lens for DX, but the 'cheaper' all round compromise for me than switching to DX. I used (STILL! Use) a 12mm fish for film; that lens is actually fixed focus, and a bit more restrictive on apertures, and doesn't quite give a full-round 180 deg FoV,; it only delivers about 120 Deg side to side with a vignetted frame; BUT, it WAS (relatively!) cheap. I paid about £20 or £30 I think for it umpety decades ago. There are a few similar low-rent manual focus or fixed focus fish for full-frame knocking about now, even brand new for not a lot of money; which could offer a pretty useful solution; given that ultimate resolution will be damped, first by pixels lost to masking, then by likely post-processing after.

For getting 'in'to tight spaces, like car cabins; these really are in there element; one may not be the one-stop solution to all restricted access situations, but they can be darn helpful, and with true 'radial' perspective, they can render things like steering wheels a lot more naturally, than a rectilinear lens that tries to stretch them into the corners of the frame 'un-naturally', and you will likely find that an un-corrected fish-eye view, 'works' better in some circumstances like that; so a fish 'may' be more useful than an ultra-wide in some situations, in the 'over-lap' between the two.. as a compliment to rather than an instead of.....

BUT, for what more low-tech fixed or manual focus fish cost; one could be a very useful to have a go with.
 
Sigma 12-24 is pretty much as wide as you can go on Fx without fishing up. It's also extremely well corrected for rectilinear distortions, although perspective is pretty extreme at the wide end! If you don't mine fisheye, their (Sigma's) 8mm is Fx and gives a full 180 degree circular image. Staying with AF lenses, Tamron did a 14mm f/2.8, as did (IIRC) Sigma and going manual, Samyang still make one (14mm f/2.8).
 
Nod said:
Sigma 12-24 is pretty much as wide as you can go on Fx without fishing up. It's also extremely well corrected for rectilinear distortions, although perspective is pretty extreme at the wide end! If you don't mine fisheye, their (Sigma's) 8mm is Fx and gives a full 180 degree circular image. Staying with AF lenses, Tamron did a 14mm f/2.8, as did (IIRC) Sigma and going manual, Samyang still make one (14mm f/2.8).
Click to expand...

Can't say about Nokon, but I have the Samyang 14mm f2.8 on my canon 5D mk3. Great lens
for cars it's pretty wide...
IMG_7121.jpg
156431012.jpg


But its a great, cheap wide lens

156430993.jpg
 
Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX lens can be used as a 16mm prime on full frame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top