Which wide angle Nikon fit...?

Amp34

Amp34

Messages
2,859
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm finally getting round to getting a Nikon fit wide angle lens to replace the canon fit Tokina I have. My first instinct was to head for the Tokina 11-16 as its a stunning lens and fits in nicely with the Nikon 17-55, however there are obviously other options to be taken into consideration. For example the Nikon 12-24 and cheaper 10-24 or just stick with the 12-24 f/4 which loses that extra stop but has better overlap with the 17-55. What are the Nikons like build quality wise? One of the things I love about the Tokina is the bulletproof build quality, are the Nikons anything like them, assuming none are weatherproof?

Thanks
 
I had a Sigma 10-20. I bought it cheap as it had some small marks on the front lens, which made no difference - think around £170. It was brilliant!! It is only something like a f4-5.6 lens but I never needed to be shooting it at 2.8. Brilliant value and only sold as I got a d700.
 
I had the Tokina 11-16 & it really was a great lens. Built like a tank too. I can't compare it to the Nikons though because I haven't used them.
 
I bought the Sigma 10-20mm for my D300 and still use it now after 5 years. When I bought a D700 I got myself a Nikon 12-24 because of FF, but ended up selling due to not using it as much, and not being able to easily fit filters. The build quality was good, but still prefer the Sigma for some reason.
 
feek said:
I bought the Sigma 10-20mm for my D300 and still use it now after 5 years. When I bought a D700 I got myself a Nikon 12-24 because of FF, but ended up selling due to not using it as much, and not being able to easily fit filters. The build quality was good, but still prefer the Sigma for some reason.
Click to expand...

Isn't that a DX Lens?
 
Thanks for the replies so far, im not really interested in the Sigmas or Tamrons as I have bad experiences with both and chose the Tokinas over them last time I was on the hunt. Interesting comment about the Nikon not being built as well as the Sigmas, that means they won't be anywhere near the Tokinas as well then.
 
Buy the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 - it's probably the best super-wide Nikon-fit DX lens you can buy. Don't regret buying mine.
 
The Sigma 12-24 is a full frame lens as is the Nikkor 14-24. Nikkor's 12-24 is Dx and will work in Dx mode at all lengths on FF bodies but will vignette on them at shorter lengths, rendering them unuseable.
 
The Nikon 12-24mm is on a par with the 17-55mm on build-quality, I would say. It's a gold ring lens, which Nikon don't bless their lesser lenses with.
 
Interesting to hear, thanks.

After the large number of fish eyes I've seen on the forum recently I'm now starting to wonder if maybe I should think about a cheap fisheye (say the samyang). I'll be shooting night sky's mostly so the extra fov of a fisheye could be an interesting thing t play with. Anyone got experience of using fish eyes for that sort of thing?
 
The plus side is that (if it's a full 180° round fisheye) you'll get the whole sky in while the negative is that the individual stars will be tiny pinpricks and may end up hidden in the noise.

I have a fisheye but have never used it for night shots, prefering to use a 24-70 for that purpose (the extra stops of light grabbing are handy!)
 
The difference between F/2.8 and F/3.5 is minimal, but a Samyang at 8mm offers a very solid 50 seconds of non-star-scraping exposure on a DX. Yummy! :)

[edit] Hmm.. 2.8-3.5 is a 2/3 stop difference. On a DX, 24mm offers 17 seconds, so the Samyang's giving 3x longer exposure at 50 seconds. Samyang wins, for me :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top