Which ultra-wide zoom for dx?

[andy a.]

The primary body will be a D70.

 

I think the nikkor 12-24 is out due to price. All reviews I've seen

compare the sigma and tokina favorably and they are much cheaper.

 

Between the sigma and tokina, it gets tougher. I could use the sigma

on my older manual bodies (fm3a, fm2n, etc.), albeit with that

fixed-aperture G crap. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind the faster

aperture of the tokina and the better price.

 

As far as the dx lenses, when mounted on a full-frame body, how much

is cropped? Can you zoom to say 18 and get full coverage? I'm still

trying to gauge if I'd want the capability to mount it on a film body.

The truth is I've shot next to no film since I got the d70 a year

ago. That feature might not be worth the $200 price difference.

 

Finally, there is the tamron 11-18. 11 is a big difference from 12,

so I'm wondering if I should wait for this to hit the market. Anyone

know when it's supposed to be released and what it will cost? I have

a Europe trip in just over a month, and I'd like it by then.

[ellis_vener_photography]

With the Nikon 12-24mm I get full 24x36mm frame coverage from 17mm to 24mm.

 

I tend to stay away from brands like Tokina, Sigma nad Tamron etc., but last week I used

a Sigma 15-40mm on a Canon EOS 10D and the results were terrible: soft at all apertures

and slow. I thought it was the camera at fault so I tried the same body with a Canon L lens

in the same focal length range: the results were good to fine. This experience just

confirmed my thinking.

[brian_tilley1]

Andy - if you want a super-wide that you can use on a film body as well as digital, look no further than the Sigma EX 12-24. It covers the full 35mm frame at all focal lengths, and distortion is very well-controlled. As you say, it's a "G" lens, which is a bit limiting on MF bodies. Also you can't use front filters, and it's a bit bulky. I think the Tamron 11-18mm is out imminently. Pricing should be similar to the Sigma and Tokina 12-24mm lenses, I expect.

 

Ellis - there is no Sigma 15-40mm lens. Did you mean the 20-40mm or 15-30mm? Either way, the latest Sigma EX wide zoom lenses are significantly improved over these older designs.

[andy a.]

Ellis: That's great news about the nikon 12-24. 17 is realistically as wide as I'd want to go. As far as 3rd-party brands, I would have said the same, except reviews of these sigma and tokina lenses are pretty stellar. Build quality as good as nikon and image quality pretty darn close.

 

Brian: Yeah, I knew that the sigma has full-frame coverage. That's what's making the decision harder. Ultra-ultra wide on the film body for occasional fun shots with the fm3a (sigma), or faster all-around aperture and $200 less (tokina). This is assuming of course that the image quality between these two is close enough not to care. I have not seen a head to head review.

 

I also see that the nikon is down to around $900ish now. Maybe that's low enough to be worth the extra. That is probably still beyond my budget however. I really liked the idea of $500 or under.

[ellis_vener_photography]

i meant the 15-30mm.

[walterh]

Andy the sigma zoom is in no way of "same" mechanical "built" quality as the nikon. hold both in your hands and see. the sigma looks good but the nikon seems better to me. I tested the nikon and the sigma on the street hand held - since this will be my only use for this lens. (I got primes for "slower" applications). you might be interested to see my comments here:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00AG59

 

optically both the nikon and the sigma have their pros and cons. what you do not see in an optical benchmark test is the funny unexplained (i dont get it others might) difference in light metering. the sigma was always a 1/2 f stop darker than optimal. this finally had me decide to get the nikon. yes - one can compensate with no problem but i do change lenses and it bothered me to have to think about it. other than that if you need the wider end more (and use on film) go for the sigma if the 24mm end is more important take the nikon.

[harvey_edelstein1]

Did you read the Photo.net review of the Tokina 12-24mm F4.0 on the home page reviews list? I handled it and it impressed me with its specs and well built construction. It is also supposed to beat all the competition optically and it is selling for under $500. It is a good match for the D70 because it is a DX lens. It takes Nikon standard 77mm filters and the front element doesn't rotate so your ND grad and polarizers will stay perfectly still. Look at the specs and you will see this is a pro level lens.

[andy a.]

Your points are well-taken Walter. I peeked at the sigma and nikon in a local store. I saw that the sigma is bigger, but I didn't get a chance to see much else. I think I'll take my camera there and see if they will allow some outdoor test shots.

 

One downside is they don't carry tokina. The only way I could test that is by ordering from b&h/adorama.

[wilfred_wong]

the nikon 12-24 , without any filter, 16mm is usable. add a filter and 18mm and up is fine. the 18-24mm range is what the 12-24 DX performance at best.

 

I tried a sigma 12-24 on a 10D. Not very impressed, esp it's big, hate it's front element, and flare easily.

 

i've tried the tokina on a D100 and D2H in a shop. it seems very nice, but havn't donw any direct comparison with my nikkor. Don't know how it perform at higher resolution. The tokina is bigger, heavier than the nikkor but the tokina don't 've AFS(the tokina focus very fast, just with more noise and 've no manual override).

 

personally, i'd prefer 12-24 to 11-18. because i don't need that wide and 12 is usually wider than i need.(don't like too much prespective distortion)

[gary_hagan1]

The Tamron 11-18 is now in stock at B&H