Wide-angle Lens advice needed:for D90

[ichowdhury]

<p>i have been shooting for almost a year with my nikon D90 ,.....55-200mm & 50mm f1.4 lens... both lens being telephoto, im always in a tough spot when shooting wide-angle shots.....i want to buy a lens that would cover the 'wide angle' focal lengths & help me to shoot landscapes, events,weddings,low-light...etc..<br>

i have medium budget & quite stuck on the choice of lens...im considering one of the lens below...& i need some opinion/advice from people who have experience with these lens ...plz help me decide which lens to buy....<br>

3rd Party : (1) Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 , ...i like shooting low-light conditions...i want to know if the autofocus is good enough for low-light <br>

(2) Tokina 12-24mm : i heard good things about it...the focal length interests me, 12mm will give extreme wide photos, ...but, the "12-24mm range",is it good for regular wide-angle shots(will it be useful in a wedding....) .... its not available in my country ,so i need to order it from outside the country(means i need to wait 2-3months to get it.... )<br /><br />Nikon : (1) 35mm f1.8, this is a very good lens....but, using a prime will make getting the shots harder....? 17mm(of tamron 17-50) or 18mm(of nikon18-105mm) would give me more flexibility with the shot..... i actually dont have that much experience with wideangle, so some advice with focal length is appreciated.... :)<br /><br /> (2) Nikon 18-105mm or <br /> (3) a used Nikon 24-85mm f2.8-4D macro....<br>

<br />i have these 5choices but, only the intention to buy one ! :( :|<br>

Nikon 17-55mm f2.8, Nikon 10-24mm DX, Nikon 12-24mm ...are too expensive for me....but, i think for wideangle these are the best .... <br>

thanks in advance...:)</p>

[purplealien]

<p>Imran</p>

<p>I'm a D90 user too. Of the lenses you've listed, I have the Nikon 35mm f1.8 and the 18-105mm.</p>

<p>I use the 35mm for low light and best quality - its a lovely lens; and always my first choice if a normal perspective is appropriate. However, you do really need something wider for events IMHO. Years ago I did a couple of weddings without a wide angle - I only had a 50mm lens (on 35mm film). It was very limiting, and group shots were particularly difficult.</p>

<p>I use the 18-105mm for general photography (walk around, events etc). It has a useful zoom range (enough to cover an event), and quality is acceptable, but I find myself wishing it was faster. It's not really the best choice for low light, although if you are skilled with using flash you can still get good results of course.</p>

<p>If events and low light is what you are most interested I would be inclined to get the Tamron, but I haven't any experience with that lens.</p>

<p>Hope this helps a bit</p>

<p>Chris</p>

<p> </p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>For wedding, the lens on your list that makes the most sense by far is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.</p>

<p>Real wide angle (like the 12-24) is not very often the right choice for people photography, so even though that Tokina is a lovely lens, it's not the most suitable one given your needs. The AF-D 24-85 f/2.8-4 is not that great, I would forget about that one. The 18-105VR is great value for money and a really nice lens - but its aperture will have you struggling in low light.<br>

The 35mm f/1.8 is a great lens. For what it costs, it's just brilliant. But, for events - you'll miss the flexibility. It's not a bad choice, but you'll find yourself still in problems for the wide angle shots.</p>

<p>If you plan to do weddings professionally, do take note that 'low light' only goes so far - even with a f/2.8 lens, you'll still need a flash.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Wouter got it right.</p>

<p>You don't want or need really wide for people photography.</p>

<p>If you do need really wide on DX for other things, I've used the Tokina 11-16 and 12-24. They are real bargains and take wonderful photos on the D90.</p>

[marklcooper]

<p>I have a D300. My lenses are Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, Nikon 17-55 f/2.8, Nikon 70-200 f/2.8, and a Sigma 30 f/1.4. My main go-to lens is the 17-55. I can easily recommend the Nikon, or the Sigma or Tamron variant of this lens. My understanding from many posters on photo.net is the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is an excellent lens. My first lens was the Nikon 17-55 because I knew it would fit 80% of my needs: walk-around, events, casual portraits, family shots, etc.</p><div></div>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i also have a d90. i had the tamron 17-50 and own the tokina 12-24 and the nikon 35/1.8. if you can track down the non-BIM version of the tamron, go for it. otherwise, check out the sigma 17-50/2.8 OS HSM (which i'm currently using). the sigma has faster AF and stabilization. IQ is maybe slightly better on the tamron, but only slightly (it's a hair sharper at 2.8). the tokina is also a great lens, but it's much more specialized and not as suited for everyday use. as for the 35/1.8, it's bit better for indoor shots than a 50, but it wouldn't have as much impact on your overall photographic capabilities as a standard 2.8 zoom or an ultrawide.</p>

[stephen_worth]

<p>I have a D7000 and I use the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Tokina 11-16 2.8 (both screw drives). I am thoroughly happy with both. No need for Nikon lenses in this range. Both of these are just as good as the Nikon equivalent.</p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>You are all over the place with your potential lenses, going from wide angles to midrange zooms to a normal prime, so if I were you, I'd try to nail down exactly what I was looking for. If I were in your position, I'd be looking for a midrange lens. There's a reason that pretty much every camera comes with a midrange lens, which you are sorely lacking. Go look at pretty much every Nikon DX camera, and when sold with a lens, it has one that starts at 16mm to 18mm. I have the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, and I love it. The same is true for its competitors from Sony, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, etc. Heck, even looking at digital compact cameras, pretty much every one has a zoom lens that starts between 24mm and 35mm equivalent. Consider the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS as well instead of the Tamron, as it has fast focusing because of the ultrasonic motor. I'd recommend that you pick up one of those midrange zoom lenses to solve your current problem, but since the 35mm f/1.8 is less than $200, I often say that it is a lens that EVERY Nikon DX user should own, so consider picking one up as well.</p>

<p>Mark Cooper is right about a midrange zoom lens, whether it's an 18-55mm, 18-105mm, 17-50mm, 17-55mm, 16-85mm, etc. It is the lens that 90% of people are going to use for 90% of their photos.</p>

[mark_stephan2]

<p>I have both the Nikon 17-55 and Tamron 17-50 VC and both are fantastic lenses. If you do a lot of video the VC of the Tamron comes in handy, both are very, very sharp. Budget wise, the Tamron would fit your needs nicely and for wedding work you'd be surprised how much you would use it at f/2.8 for the subject isolation and dreamy bokeh.</p>

[mark_stephan2]

<p>I have both the Nikon 17-55 and Tamron 17-50 VC and both are fantastic lenses. If you do a lot of video the VC of the Tamron comes in handy, both are very, very sharp. Budget wise, the Tamron would fit your needs nicely and for wedding work you'd be surprised how much you would use it at f/2.8 for the subject isolation and dreamy bokeh.</p>

[ichowdhury]

<p>thanks everyone ! :D all your advice are really helpful....i will go for the 17-50mm f2.8 either tamron or sigma...i think this lens will give me the most flexibility in most of my shooting conditions....</p>

<p> </p>