Jump to content

Wide angle for DX camera D5000


sunilmendiratta

Recommended Posts

<p>I currently have 18-55 and 55-200 mm VR lens. I am looking for wider end and i checked 4 lenses<br>

Sigma 10-20 F 4-5.6, Sigma 10-20 F3.5, Tokina 12-24, and Tamaron 10-24mm. I can assume nikon lense is better than these one but that is very expensive..<br>

On net i saw very good reviews on Sigma and at the same time people complain about quality controls at Sigma as some copies are bad and they had to return....<br>

any suggestions!!!!!</p>

<p>Regards,<br>

Sunil</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I bought a Tamron 10-24mm a few months ago, and was not pleased with the results.</p>

<p>So I bought the Nikon 10-24mm. It has noticeably better sharpness and less distortion.</p>

<p>YMMV</p>

<p>I was disappointed because I have the Tamron 18-270mm zoom, and it's an excellent lens.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>My run down:</p>

<p>Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 if you shoot landscape.<br>

Tokina 12-24 f4 if you shoot people.<br>

The Sigma 3.5 if you have a lot of dough and don't mind being a pygmy pig (still, not too many reviews)...82mm filter though. Kinda weird lens imo...<br>

Tamron 10-24 if you need the big range, Most all the reviews say it isn't too sharp, it'a a compromise for the big range..</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 and I like it very much. It's only shortcoming is noticable barrel distortion at 10mm. If it bothers you, it can be fixed in postprocessing. The Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 is more expensive and I doubt if it's worth it. You can handhold ultrawides at very slow shutter speeds and your D5000 is pretty good up to ISO 1600, so I doubt if you need the extra lens speed.</p>

<p>The Tokina 12-24 has gotten very good reviews and people on the forum generally like it. The Tamron 10-24 is relatively new and I don't know anything about it. All I can say is that Tamron makes some very good lenses.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, Leigh, the nikon is almost twice the price of the tamron. Maybe your nikon is twice as sharp and have 1/2 distortion? Sometimes, you do get lucky but the compromise usually include the price of the lens somewhere... </p>

<p>nikon 10-24mm = $799<br>

tamron 10-24mm = $424 (after rebate)<br>

tokina 12-24mm II = $499<br>

sigma 10-20 f3.5 = $649<br>

sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 =$479</p>

<p>Prices via B&H</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>It's enough sharper that the difference was obvious on the camera's LCD screen. That's a big difference.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Well, according to some website...the tamron (2%) has slightly less distortion than the nikon (3%) at the wide end. I'm sure the nikon did better in the range. Anyway, I'm sure the nikon is better overall but some people like the OP either can't afford or don't want to spend the extra money. That's all fine...we can correct distortion in post anyway if we wish. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Take a good look at the Tokina 11-16 AT-X Pro. It is fast (f2.8) and sharp. I love mine. Build quality is quite good and did I mention it is sharp. I think I paid about $500 for it. a bargain.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, it is a excellent lens but I don't think it will AF with a d5000 due to lack of motor AFAIK. Besides, the OP shoot landscapes...no need for f2.8.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Anyway, I'm sure the nikon is better overall but some people like the OP either can't afford or don't want to spend the extra money.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Money is always a consideration when buying equipment. I haven't won the lottery (yet).</p>

<p>I address the problem by buying good used if I can't afford the same item new. There are tradeoffs, obviously, but you can frequently get the same item in excellent condition for perhaps 60% of new price.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>i would avoid the tamron 10-24. your best bet is probably a sigma 10-20, used or new, if you want to keep the price reasonable. that will AF on your camera -- though you might find, for critical landscape work, a tripod is better. you could get a tokina 12-24 w/ built in motor or the used nikon 12-24 for just over the cost of the sigma, but 10mm is better than 12mm when it comes to UWAs. the image quality differences will be incremental, since you'll likely be stopping down anyway (except for the tamron, which almost every review says is the worst of the bunch).</p>

<p>you may want to consider the 11-16, since, with that limited range, you won't be taking many people shots, if any, and for landscapes and cityscapes, manual focusing with or without a tripod, is not a big deal with an UWA. the tokina's MF/AF switch is very smooth. that lens has the best IQ of the bunch, plus it's 2.8.</p>

<p>if you can bump the budget to almost double or double, the choices (for a d5000) become nikon 10-24 or sigma 8-16. 8mm on DX is ridiculously wide; 10-24 is still quite wide and an overall versatile range. the main advantage over the nikon vs. the sigma is the ability to use filters (which is a big plus), not to mention the longer range.</p>

<p>but if you're on a budget and AF on an UWA is a priority, the 10-20 is (still) a good choice. it can take filters too, and if you've never used an ultrawide before, i'm sure you'll be tickled pink by the ability to go to 10mm. that's why i said it was your best bet.</p>

<div>00Y3Dy-322241584.jpg.184fa44e5df428f25f4276ba0c826fab.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I appreciate the inputs provided by each one of you.But i have still doubts so i am using elimination instead of selection.</p>

<p>Tokina 11-16 can not AF on D5000 and i am not willing to pay that much on MF.<br>

Tamaron is not recommended as it is worst of bunch.....<br>

Sigma 10-20 (New version is expensive not not have much benefit over previous version and someone mentioned it is like PIG)<br>

Now choice comes to<br>

Tokina 12-24<br>

Sigma 10-20<br>

Nikkor 10-24<br>

Now if i want to print bigger than 8X10 then which one to get, i am feeling robbed if i buy nikon.<br>

Tokina 12-24 (New version which will AF )<br>

Sigma 10-20<br>

Which one?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><em>Now if i want to print bigger than 8X10 then which one to get, i am feeling robbed if i buy nikon.</em><br /><em> Tokina 12-24 (New version which will AF )</em><br /><em> Sigma 10-20</em><br /><em> Which one?</em></p>

<p>both of those lenses are more than capable of 16x20 prints with a d5000. your results will probably have a lot to do with your methodology: if you use a tripod and stop down, as opposed to handholding, you'll get sharper pics with crisp corners. i have the tokina 12-24 original version, and it's excellent, but if i were you i would go for the sigma for the 10mm.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>sunil, i took a look at your pics. i think you're on your way. i would suggest perhaps experimenting with some longer exposures at twilight/sunset which can really "burn in" details at large aperture numbers and base ISO. you can get some crazy natural colors this way...</p><div>00Y3Tw-322537584.jpg.25328428376767617dfe6fddcbd0ba07.jpg</div>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...