Which UWA for 'baby' Nikons?

Llamaman

Llamaman

Proud Addick
Messages
7,422
Name
Not an addick!
Edit My Images
Yes
I've developed an unhealthy hankering for something wider than 18mm for my D5000.

Alas, the most popular recommendation (Tokina 11-16) won't AF on my camera.

The options appear to be, in ascending price, Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, Tokina 12-24 mk2 and the Nikon 10-24.

I was hoping to spend £250-£300 2nd hand, but is the Nikon worth the extra?
Uncle Ken recommends the Nikon, but I'm always a bit wary of his views...
Anyone used one (or even better, more than one) of these? Or anything else?
 
If your going that wide do you need AF? Assumingly your mostly taking landscapes and should be able to check the focus post shoot.
 
I went to Park Cameras the other day and tried the Sigma 8-16 and the Nikon 10-24. I took my 17-55 f2.8 and shot scenes with all three

The Nikon 10-24 is exactly like the 17-55 for image quality (and the 17-55 is superb). It focusses very close and is easy to work with

The Sigma is muddy and I really disliked the images from it

The 10-24 has a 77 mm filter thread like all my lenses, handles like a Nikon and images look like I expect. The range (10-24) is wide enough to make the lens more than a one-trick pony and it'll be fine for most walking around shots, interiors & confined spaces. With lens hood it's smaller & less conspicuous than the 17-55, too

Nikon lenses are always going to be worth money in the future. Add in the fact that prices are rising and it's obvious that depreciation will be minimal if you want to go FX later. For me it's a no-brainer

Nick Froome
 
Canon 10-22. Oh, hang on...
 
I have a Nikon 10-24 and have been really happy with it. Taken some (imo) great images with it! :D

I went for the Nikon over the choices you posted above too.
 
Sigh. It's always the expensive one that you want, isn't it?

Still, it's not like I need to eat EVERY day is it... ;)
 
Can I give my two-penn'th in support of the Tok 12-24.

I sold mine when I thought my crop-sensor days were behind me (they're back). Sold it to a well known high street buy/sell chain for £190 and they had it on sale within a couple of weeks for £399 ! (Was mint.)

I still admire the photos from that lens on the D200; and think what a damn fool I was to get rid. Might get another.

All the best.
 
I really liked my Sigma 10-20 and so do a lot of people, mine was pretty damn sharp in the center and good enough at the edges.

The Nikon version is great too but some prefer the Sigma.

The oft cited 'best' is the Tokina 11-16 which is the one to go for if you can live with the limited range (which you probably can, I alway shoot my sigma at 10mm).
 
I would recommend the Tokina 12-24 as well - I've also owned the Sig 10-20 but much prefered the Tokina....
 
Solution is easy, make the decision to buy the Nikon 10-24, but then don't. Having decided to spend that much money then go buy a D90, sell your D5000 and then get the 11-16 :D

BTW have a 10-20 Sigma on my K-5 and it is great and don't forget about the 12-24 Nikkor - VERY VERY good, probably better than the 10-24 but if you really want wide you will miss those 2mm. I had and sold a Tamron 10-24. I was very happy with the images but not with the AF on the D40. On the D7000 it was a excellent both for IQ and for AF speed.
 
Last edited:
I think the point is that none of them are perfect and each has particular strengths and weaknesses, you just need to decide which one will be best for you.
 
vrapan said:
Solution is easy, make the decision to buy the Nikon 10-24, but then don't. Having decided to spend that much money then go buy a D90, sell your D5000 and then get the 11-16 :D
Click to expand...

Not sure that works. The Nikon seems to go for £400 second hand (judging by the one I appear to have missed out on here!) and I think I'd struggle to get a D90 and the Tokina for £400 + D5000. The D5k seems to have a poor resale value :(

Also, I'm not really sure a D90 is a smart upgrade. Given my chance again, I'd go for the D90, but now I've got a D5000 I'd lose a fair amount of money for not much more camera. Whilst the D90 has a motor (which until now I've not missed) and a better viewfinder, at it's heart it has the same AF, sensor and processor as the D5k. My upgrade plan is to move to a D7k once they come down in price ( I'm hoping a few come available when the D300s successor is released). In the meantime, I'll have to 'make do' with AF-S lenses. I'm buying 2nd hand so if I decide to sell them later I shouldn't lose too much.
 
Nikon 12-24 is the daddy - truly one of the sharpest lenses I've used and the best build of any of the UWA lenses available in NAF. However, it's expensive at full RRP, although you'll get a good used one for about £450.

Of the 3rd-party ones, the Tokina 12-24mm f/4 takes some beating and I'd say it was as close as could be optically to the Nikon. Build was good, but not on the level of the Nikon, but then again it's a cheaper lens.
 
In that case Sigma/Tamron should be what you should be going after really.

I had the Tamron and it is very nice I now have the Sigma and it is just as good. The Tamron is more versatile because at a push you can use it as a walkabout and maybe carry one of those new 50mm 1.8 Nikkors. The Sigma many say is better but 20 is a bit too wide to rely on it being a sole lens for a day.

I definitely see your point of the D90 but it is a great camera so if you were not thinking of upgrading soon it would make some sense buying it but if you are after a D7k then sure wait for it.

What I was going to say is that if you are looking into the 12-24 and if you really want a UWA then you will definitely miss those 2mm on the wide side. It does not sound like much but they give you an extra 15-20 degrees of view which is very significant. I had the 12-24 Nikkor and loved it but I always thought the Tamron was a better UWA cause of those extra 2mm.
 
I'm putting a vote in for the sigma 10-20 :D

great lens which I've used with my D5000, it's a lot of fun and superbly sharp with great colours.

I also really like the soft case it comes with - not really significant when you're taking pics, but much better than the little pocket thing you get with Nikon lenses.

I've just upgraded to a D7000 and it's lovely on that too :)

hope this helps :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top