Ultra wide lens for FX camera

doublem1

doublem1

Messages
472
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
As I am thinking of making the jump from DX to FX, I'm having to research replacement lenses. I'm into urban exploring and rooftops. The mainly use a Tokina 11-16mm lens on my D90. My budget is about £400. Can anyone recommend me a decent lens for an FX camera? Most likely a D600.

The most ideal lens I can see in my budget is an 18-35mm f3.5-4.5g ED. However I may miss the constant 2.8 of the Tokina. Tokina do have a similar lens for FX, the 16-28mm, but it's a huge and almost 1kg in weight.
 
There's always the Sigma 12-24. Should be able to find one within your £400 budget - 2nd hand.
 
Apart from the bulbous front element, weight and possible decentering issues you cannot go wrong with the Tokina 16-28.

It is a fabulous lens.

Bitterly regret selling mine !

Regards

Gary
 
Typically above budget, but I picked up my Nikon 16-35 for under £600, so if you are able to move, it is a cracking lens.
 
I'll look into the Sigma.

cambsno said:
Typically above budget, but I picked up my Nikon 16-35 for under £600, so if you are able to move, it is a cracking lens.
Click to expand...

I may stretch to the £500. I will keep an eye out for one of these too. I'll sell my D90 and 11-16mm, source a D600 and then see what I'm left with!
 
I did have the Tamron 17-35 2.8-4 - not a bad lens and for £200 or so its good value, there is one in the forums here I think, not up to the Nikon but decent enough.
 
doublem1 said:
The most ideal lens I can see in my budget is an 18-35mm f3.5-4.5g ED. However I may miss the constant 2.8 of the Tokina. Tokina do have a similar lens for FX, the 16-28mm, but it's a huge and almost 1kg in weight.
Click to expand...

i got the AF-S version of the 18-35 it is excellent. the old AF-D version was rubbish (accordingly to all the reviews). Depend on what you shooting, i never use f2.8 or rarely ever use large aperture due to cityscape/landscaping picture. but i guess if u do events/ weddings then the f2.8 would help get the extra bit of light while the DoF isn't critical.
 
Last edited:
Samyang 14mm 2.8? Well under budget, and pretty awesome (and very, very wide!)
 
I think I'm fairly set on getting the 18-35mm f3.5-4.5g ED lens. From what I've seen and read the image quality is very decent.
 
I had the 18-35G for a short time, it's superb and a great choice if 18mm is wide enough. Very light too, would make a great combo with the D600 as a lightweight ultrawide FX solution.
 
ricky1980 said:
i got the AF-S version of the 18-35 it is excellent. the old AF-D version was rubbish (accordingly to all the reviews). Depend on what you shooting, i never use f2.8 or rarely ever use large aperture due to cityscape/landscaping picture. but i guess if u do events/ weddings then the f2.8 would help get the extra bit of light while the DoF isn't critical.
Click to expand...


I rather liked my 18-35 AFD, it was sharp enough, generally wide enough, lightweight and cheap. My only issue was the slightly funky moustache shaped distortion which was difficult to correct but that is only a problem if you shoot seascapes.

If I were on the hunt for a cheap wide zoom it'd be on my shortlist.
 
Nawty said:
I rather liked my 18-35 AFD, it was sharp enough, generally wide enough, lightweight and cheap. My only issue was the slightly funky moustache shaped distortion which was difficult to correct but that is only a problem if you shoot seascapes.

If I were on the hunt for a cheap wide zoom it'd be on my shortlist.
Click to expand...

Moustache shaped distortion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top