Tokina 12-24 or recommend another.

Redspider

Redspider

Messages
1,678
Edit My Images
Yes
At the moment I have a Nikon 18-105VR lens that I use for landscapes. I have noticed the Tokina 12-24 gets good reviews. It seems it can be bought for around £300-00. Does anyone have one & do they like it, any problems? Can anyone recommend another lens near this price that may be better? Thanks for any help.
 
For Nikon shooters, its probably the best choice out of all the wides I think on price / performance.
 
Redspider said:
Thanks. Is the f4 as sharp as the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 11-16?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I never seen or used the 11-16.

Unless you plan to shoot wide open, assume that at f/8 both with be as sharp as you could ever need, so look at the focal range.

IMHO (and I've never used one) 11-16 is just too narrow a range to be truely useful, I'd only consider one if I had a second body to use it on, too much lens swapping I reckon otherwise...
 
puddleduck said:
Sorry, I never seen or used the 11-16.

Unless you plan to shoot wide open, assume that at f/8 both with be as sharp as you could ever need, so look at the focal range.

IMHO (and I've never used one) 11-16 is just too narrow a range to be truely useful, I'd only consider one if I had a second body to use it on, too much lens swapping I reckon otherwise...
Click to expand...

OK. Thanks for the help. I'll probably go for the 12-24.
 
Just one thought...

If there's a chance you might upgrade your body to an Fx one (or use 35mm), the Sigma 12-24 might be a better choice since it gives FF coverage while the Tokina is a Dx (APS-C) lens.
 
Nod said:
Just one thought...

If there's a chance you might upgrade your body to an Fx one (or use 35mm), the Sigma 12-24 might be a better choice since it gives FF coverage while the Tokina is a Dx (APS-C) lens.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the sugestion but a little pricey at the moment.
 
I've got a Sigma 12-24 and its very good. But its really hard to find one with even centering. I think they make them de-centered for a laugh.

-Andy
 
Is it worth going for the 12-24 mk 11. It has a built in motor, but I have a D90 so don't need it, however is there any advantage to me. It's around £60-00 more.
 
As you say, you don't need the motor, so only advantage would be if you also intended to use it with a D40/D60/D5000 body. It would also have a wider audience when it came to sell it on, but probably wouldn't achieve £60 more than a non-motor version.
 
f1charlie said:
As you say, you don't need the motor, so only advantage would be if you also intended to use it with a D40/D60/D5000 body. It would also have a wider audience when it came to sell it on, but probably wouldn't achieve £60 more than a non-motor version.
Click to expand...

Thats what I thought. Thanks for your help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top