Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f2.8 or Sigma 12-24mm f4.5-5.6 II DG HSM for D800 ?

[attilio_peschiera]

<p>I need a wide angle zoom lens form my Nikon D800.<br /> Wich is better between<br /> Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f2.8<br /> and<br /> Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 II DG HSM for D800 ?<br /> The first one is f2.8 constant, the second one is only f4.5-5.6<br /> <br />I'd like to buy wich is better.</p>

<p>I have had yet Tokina DX 12-24 for my D200 and was a very good lens, I have ad also Sigma 30 DX f1.4<br /> I prefer the Tokina look and I like a lot my Tokina lens, but the Sigma seems be very good.</p>

<p>What do you suggest between this two zooms ? Sigma or Tokina ?</p>

[attilio_peschiera]

<p>I need it for landscapes</p>

[hammer531]

<p>If youare doing landscapes you aare probably using a tripod , so you may not need the 2.8 but on the other hand you might need the wider view . Not owning either lenss I would most likely go with ths Sigma .</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Not everybody shoots landscape the same way, but to me, the most useful wide angle for landscape is something like a 16-35mm/f4 type lens. 20mm should be plenty wide and 16mm gives you something extra, while I find the 24-35mm range most useful, and you don't need faster than f4 for landscape.</p>

<p>In other words, from my point of view, neither one of the two lenses the OP lists is ideal, but your mileage may vary. Another issue to keep in mind is that we still tend to use filters sometimes in landscape photography. Some lenses such as the Sigma 12-24 full-frame lens make it impractical to use filters at all.</p>

[mihai_ciuca]

<p>The new Tokina 17-35/4 is a good performer for landscape work. Receives filters, is compact and has a decent price tag. The build quality is nothing to complaint about.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>I'm with Shun on this one, and worth to note: the 16-28 Tokina also doesn't take filters. </p>

<p>You'll need to first sort out the focal lengths you really need, as 12mm is insanely wide. Assuming the D800 is not your first DSLR, what lenses have you used so far? What other lenses do you have with the D800, and what is your budget?</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>Here is a link to the <em>Popular Photography</em> test of the Tokina</p>

<p><a href="http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2010/12/tested-tokina-x-16-28mm-f28-pro-fx">http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2010/12/tested-tokina-x-16-28mm-f28-pro-fx</a></p>

<p>They consider it "best in class".<br>

They do not have a formal test of the Sigma, but here is their impression of the lens:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.popphoto.com/buying-guide/lens/sigma-12-24mm-f45-56-ex-dg-hsm">http://www.popphoto.com/buying-guide/lens/sigma-12-24mm-f45-56-ex-dg-hsm</a></p>

<p>The Sigma had more measured distortion.</p>

<p> </p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Judging by your portfolio I suggest the Sigma 12-24, however I recommend saving for awhile yet and get yourself a used Nikon 14-24/2.8</p>

<p>Having considered your portfolio a little further I suggest you research the possiblity of a PC, perspective control, lens. I know the new Nikon 24 PC-E is awesome, but also very expensive. Although they are a pain in the neck to use the much older manual focus Nikon 28 PC (f3.5 or f4) or Nikon 35 PC(f3.5 or f2.8) are relatively inexpensive and very good. I use a Nikon 35/2.8 PC and Canon 17 TS-E on my Canon 5D II. Image quality from both is very good and I use them to correct perspective in architecture and in landscapes. I also use them both extensively for shifting and stitching two or three images together to create medium format sized images for very large prints. After stitching, the D800 will create tiff files in the 500 MB range so computer speed and memory is a necessity. If you stitch to the maximum capability the 35 PC provides the view of a 24mm lens and the 28 PC provides a view (approximately) of about 21mm.</p>

<p>I bought my 35 PC in the fall for under $250 USD so it is something you could even add to your zoom choice and experiment with its use. Of course it is manual focus and has an odd aperture control so that you can focus while wide open then quickly stop down for exposure. It is also slow to use since it only shifts in one direction so you have to shift the lens and then rotate the entire lens in the desired orientation.</p>

[kerrystratton]

<p>I have a D800e and the Sigma 12-24 lens. The lens works fine with the 800 but I tend to agree with Shun. I rarely shoot at less than 24mm also Shun is correct about filters on the Sigma; if you use them they will need to be the thinnest you can get to prevent vignetting</p>

[attilio_peschiera]

<p>I take photo since 1975 (my first Nikon has been Nikon FM, my old analogue Nikon was F70).<br /> I have had old D70 and D200 and now<br /> I Just bought D800.<br /> On D70 and D200 I used a lot Tokina 12-24 DX Lens (that on DX is not so wide but on DX is like a 18-36)</p>

<p>I have for my D800 the following lenses (bought new and used in 20 years). <br /> Nikkor: AF 20 f2.8 <br /> Nikkor AFD 24 f2.8<br /> Nikkor AIS 28 f2.8 (old manual focus)<br /> Nikkor AFD 35 f2<br /> Nikkor AFD 50 f1.4<br /> Nikkor AFD 85 f1.8<br /> Nikkor AI 105 f2.5 (old manual focus, first version AI)<br /> Nikkor 24-85 AFD 2.8-4 <br /> Nikkor 35-70 AFD f2.8<br /> Nikkor 70-200 AF 2.8 ED (first old version).</p>

<p>Now I'd like a very wide lens. Another option could be also Samyang 14 f2.8 (prime lens) (not zoom).<br /> I don't use filters, usually, so for me is not a problem. I'have to understand wich is better. <br /> (Of course, I know that wider lenses have a lot of distortion, but if I don't need distorsion I don't use wide lenses but my Nikkor 35 f2.8 or 28 AIS are a very nice lenses). I like play with distorsion using it for creative purposes in some kind of photos.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Hmmm, Sigma v Tokina eh? No contest actually. Get the Tokina. You'll probably never need a 12mm focal length on full-frame, and the corner definition will be apalling if you do. Or - and this would be my choice - save up until you can afford the 14-24mm Zoom-Nikkor. Then you can be sure you've got the best ultrawide zoom going.</p>

<p>BTW, the 28mm f/3.5 PC-Nikkor doesn't work well on a D800. Once shifted it exhibits a very noticeable colour-fringing problem. This is difficult to remove using software because the direction and severity of the fringes varies with the degree and direction of shift. OTOH, the 35mm f/2.8 PC-Nikkor works quite well, with downward shift allowing greater foreground emphasis in landscapes.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Wow, that is a lot of lenses in a tight focal range. I do love primes, and have five myself and anticipate two more, but if it were me I'd sell the first three on your list and get the 14-24, then sell the 35/2 and get the 35/2.8 PC.</p>

<p>If you prefer not to part with your primes, I did use a Nikon 14/2.8 for seven years and really enjoyed it. You can find them used in the same price range as the zooms you are looking at. The 14 is extremely sharp with very little CA. The perspective "distortion" in the corners is not distortion in the true sense and you just have to be aware of it during composition. The real distortion this lens has is "moustache" distortion that creates a wave in straight lines that are parallel to the image frame, and close to the image frame. It can be disturbing for architectural shots but goes unnoticed for landscapes. Again you just have to be aware of it and careful composition with architectural shots can minimize the effects. </p>

<p>P.S. There you go, keh has a Nikon 14/2.8 for $789 USD. There "bargain" usually means wear and tear on the body, not the lens. I have bought "bargain" from them and could not tell the difference from a lens a couple of years old.</p>

<p>The longevity of Samyang lenses is questionable, and getting a good one also seems questionable.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Attilio, you already have plenty of lenses. While I feel that some, and in fact many of your existing FX lenses are older and may or may not take the D800 to its full potential, why don't you just use them for now and see exactly what is missing?Only you can decide whether your existing lenses are good or not, on the D800.</p>

<p>As far as I can tell, you don't use lenses wider than 20mm for 35mm film and 12mm (from the 12-24) for DX, so I wonder why you need 12mm or 14mm for FX all of a sudden? Instead of all of those extreme wide lenses, why don't you get some 16-35mm/f4 for your D800; that is a very nice landscape range for FX. The problem is that even Nikon's own 17-35mm/f2.8 AF-S and 16-35mm/f4 AF-S VR show their limitations on 24 and 36MP DSLRs.</p>

<p>Incidentally, since you just bought that D800 which is close to $3000 ($2800 with rebate in these days) in the US or whatever in Euro, I sure hope that you are not another person who has poured the entire budget on an expensive camera body with not much left for lenses.</p>

[attilio_peschiera]

<p>I don't like a lot my nikkor 20 AF (I bought used), so I'm thinking to search a wide angle zoom.<br /> I bought nikon D800 used (like new, but used to save money), and I'm still paying it (for one year), I'm another person that has not much budget in general, not only for lenses, lol. But I like photography and Nikon D800, also if is not yet full payed.<br /> The question, in my opinion, is not which is better in absolute, but which is better for the use I think to do.<br /> So If I don't think to use everyday, for my work, wide angle, Samyang, or Tokina, or Sigma, could be useful for the price they costs (even if they are worst than nikon for example).<br /> I think I have to give a relative weight to what I consider to use each lens. <br /> Thanks a lot for your suggestions.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Attilio, I have a collection of primes not ,uch unlike yours (a bit less, but still too much). I can understand your point, though I also see the validity of what Shun and some of the others say. A lens like the 16-35VR (and that would be my choice for allround usability) makes a whole lot of sense.<br /> Since I'm using a D700 and not being too obsessed with pixel-perfect optics, I am totally happy with the 20mm f/3.5 AiS from eBay for a couple of euros. Would I feel a need for something seriously wider, it would be the Samyang 14 f/2.8 - it's not perfect either, but it's not that expensive and it would be a speciality lens I use every now and then. I could live with its imperfections. Would ultra-wide lenses be my primary point of interest and most-used optics, I would not be happy probably with either one of the lenses you mention. But well.... exactly for all such reasons, I do not feel a need or want for a D800, or for lenses more expensive than my ultracheap 20mm.</p>

<p>So, to which extend you want (or expect) to make optimum use of those 36 megapixels? The Samyang, and the older Nikon primes, may make a lot of sense if you do not care too much. If you do care about maximising the result from that resolution, the 16-35VR, the 14-24 Nikkors and the Zeiss 21mm would be the lenses to look at, in my view (and choosing between those 3 would still be complicated enough!).<br /> To answer more directly, between the 2 you mention, my money would go to the Tokina. But I'd save up a bit longer, and get the 14-24 if you really want to go that wide, or the Zeiss if ~20mm turns out to be enough. Maybe best to rent one of these, and give it a try.</p>

[attilio_peschiera]

<p>Thanks a lot.</p>

<p>So, the best choice is to wait and search for a nikkor.<br>

In case I'd like to have soon a superwide lens, not expensive, just to use sometime, I can think to buy samyang, that is not very good (like nikkor for example), but is not too expensive and it works (with distortion of course, but works fine for the price).<br>

I think to use a wide not only to take photos but also for wide angle video footage and Samyang seems also good for video.</p>

<p>So Merry Christmas to all and thanks a lot for your suggestions ! </p>

[hugh_sakols]

<p>I personally wouldn't worry about whether the lens accepts filters. The only filter I use is a polarizer and I don't like the effect on wide lenses. I'm in the same boat, but because I rarely shoot wider than 24mm, I don't want to pay over $1000 for a wide lens. </p>

[thomas_lozinski]

<p>I have a D800e and I returned the sigma 12-24. It was just too soft at any aperture even with 3s exposure delay on tripod etc. The tokina 16-28 is much better but heavy. I had to put some gaffers tape on the lens hood to make it more secure. (slips on doesn't lock on) Honestly I usually grab a Rokinon 14mm 2.8 instead. It's sharp, wide and cheap. It has loads of distortion but you can correct if you download the adobe lens profiles (which took me a while to figure out how to do.) If I own 2 identically performing lenses I usually grab the cheaper one for use. Less to worry about. </p>

[attilio_peschiera]

<p>I have ptlens (http://www.epaperpress.com/ptlens/) plugin for photoshop and I saw that there are profiles to correct also Samyang 14mm 2.8 and Rokinon 14mm 2.8 distorsion.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>the best in class option is the 14-24. second best is 16-28. the sigma is really only recommended if you want to go as wide as the format will let you. if you want to use filters, it's really a toss-up between nikon 16-35 VR and tokina 17-35/4. the tokina has less distortion; the nikon may be a hair sharper. IMO VR on a wide lens is kind of extraneous.</p>

<p>i personally use the sigma 15-30 on my FX camera when i want ultrawide, so i can recommend that as a bargain alternative. if you can find it used for a good price, it's worth it. you could also look for a used mikon 18-35. i also have a tokina 12-24 for my DX bodies, so i can attest to tokina's staunchness in the wide-angle field.</p>

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

<p>People who <strong>really need</strong> the <strong>12mm</strong> of course, won't buy the 16mm glass!</p>

[ShunCheung]

How many people really need 12mm on FX?

[attilio_peschiera]

<p>I bought a new Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC for nikon.<br>

Received today. I tested just for 10 minutes at home this evening and seems very good (of course for the price, I mean).<br>

Next week-end I'd like to test it outside.</p>