pacha mama photography Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 ive been thinking of getting a high quality super wide. so far, the tokina 12-24 looks like my best bet. has anyone used this before or would anyone recommend a better lens at around the same price rangE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_shooter Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Sigma 10-20mm is in my bag - the extra 2mm makes a HUGE difference. Obvious usual drawback with such a wide lens but can be fixed in pp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronald_moravec1 Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Tried a friends Sigma 10/20 last week. It seems to be a fine lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot1 Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Check this out: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FJF3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 The Tokina 12-24 is the equivalent of a DX lens, so you should be using it on a Nikon or Fuji DX sensor DSLR. Additionally, the Tokina has no AF motor built in, so if you use it on a D40/D40x, there will be no auto focus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidlong Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Ken Rockwell is your friend(?) He has a review and comparison of the Nikon 12-24, Tokina 12-24, Sigma 10-20, and Tamron 11-18. And yes, he has actually used them. <a href="http://kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm">link</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 I had the Tokina 12-24mm and sold it to get the Tokina 10-17mm which I like a lot more. If you looking SUPER wide take a look at the 10-17mm <a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c41/EastCoastHucker/_DSC0068-2.jpg" border="0" alt="Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket"></a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_in_PA Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 If a fisheye is what you're after, sure. Some of us (most of us?) would much rather have rectilinear wide angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iancoxleigh Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 I have the Tokina 12-24. It is rugged, well built, and doesn't distort too, too much. But, it has much more CA than I thought it would. I also sometimes wish for wider. If I was doing it again, I might opt for the Sigma. Except, I originally picked the Tokina over the Sigma because the Sigma is variable aperture -- yuck (it is less than f/4 max almost immediately beyond 10mm)! And, also, because I felt it was less robustly built. Plus I had a very badly made Sigma 70-300mm lens that has marred that company's reputation in my mind forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanjo_viagran Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 "Some of us (most of us?)" Speck for yourself mate,lot of people like eyefish lenses, clearly not you, no biddy.. eyefish still selling like hot bread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacha mama photography Posted June 26, 2007 Author Share Posted June 26, 2007 thank you everyone for your responses. ill keep you updated :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 i have the tokina and find i use the 24 end fairly often. the build is nice and tank-like. i get less CA with a polarizer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 nice fish pic. that's pretty w-i-d-e, i'd say. so i take it you're happy with the 10-17? what do you primarily shoot with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_in_PA Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Juanjo is very enamored with his fisheye zoom. I think it would be cool to have, too, but for purposes of clarification on this thread (in case it's used by someone for reference in the future), there is a very big difference between a fisheye with its inherent curved line distortion (Juanjo's very nice photo above is a GREAT example of this) and an ultrawide zoom which attempts to keep straight lines straight. The purposes of the two of those lenses are not the same, and they complement each other nicely, too.. Many fewer "fisheye" lenses are bought and used than wide-angle, because it is generally considered a special effect. So, Juanjo, I would have kept both Tokinas, as I think eventually you will want to take an undistorted super-wide shot, and now don't have the lens for it. (Although, for many purposes, once there is a correction profile for this lens built into DXO, it might serve both purposes.) Be careful of buying a fisheye if you really want a super-wide zoom. They are very different. I myself had a fisheye years ago with film, finally got rid of it, only ever used it for one photo that I felt was worth keeping... ymmv of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevea Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 If you get the Nikon, you won't need to buy another. Buying the best saves time wondering "what if". Time IS money. Steve Abramson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now