Super Wide Angle Lenses Decision

My guess is that many of you have already had this discussion with yourself and others. Since I'm new to the forum, Im seeking your advice/thoughts. I use a nikon D7000 and want to add a super wide angle lense. I am currenty considering either a Nikkor 12-24 MM or a Tonika 12-24MM. I've read a number of reviews on both lenses, but they only left more unsure. Therer's about a $500 price difference which makes me wonder is there a significant differnce in quality. I would appreciate any insights or additional suggestions you may have.

I rented the Nikon 12-24 and borrowed the Tokina 12-24. I found them both great. For the price the Tokina cannot be beat. I have been very pleased with my Tokina.

Good luck !!!

Andrew

Remember that the D7000 is a crop sensor camera (I also shoot a D7000). Therefore your 12mm minimum is really like an 18mm on a full frame camera. That was not wide enough for me. This is also the reason Nikon developed the 10 - 24 DX lense. The only drawback is that it only opens up to f/3.5. I bought this lens and am very happy with it. That extra 2mm can make a huge difference in the shot you can get. I have not found a situation yet where I need the bigger aperture and the shots come out quite nice from my view. This lens is quite a bit less expensive, but I feel a lot of the cost is to get the wider aperture and the full frame size in the glass. Some may say the quality of the shots is not as good but I cannot tell the difference

I did not take into consideration the full frame feature with my Nikon 7000. Maybe I should be considering a 10MM to 24MM rahter than the 12 to 24 MM. I really appreciate the input.

Just a visual confirmation of Walt's statement per differences at the wide end of things.
You might consider the Sigma 10-20 wide angle lens which is nearly half the price of the Nikon, but equals it in quality. You get a high quality lens hood and case, to boot. I used this lens with my cropped frame DSLR and it was superb! Lens tests showed that it equaled the quality of the Canon ultra wide angle lens at half the cost.

Paul,
I'd rent a UWA for a few days and then see what you favor for focal lengths. Years ago I borrowed a Sigma 10-20mm and realized that I wasn't interested in anything much wider than 12mm. I also thought that the image and build quality was somewhat lacking on the Sigma model.

Ultimately I purchased a Pentax 12-24mm f4 which is the same design as the Tokina 12-24mm. Pentax and Tokina have shared optical designs on several lenses, but have released lenses with different housings and some materials variations. The Pentax lens was very very good. When I added the Canon 7D to my toolbox, I purchased the Tokina 12-24mm as well. It's been excellent.

You may want to consider the Tokina 11-16mm f 2.8 as an alternative. It is closer in spirit to a prime lens as the focal length is fairly narrow. The reviews are very favorable too.

The Nikon 12-24mm is considered an outstanding, top-notch lens. Only you can know whether you need to spend the money or not. Most ultra-wides have decent resale value. I'd get something like the Tokina or Sigma and if you find yourself using it a lot and getting great shots, then it may be worth getting the Nikon later. To me, if I use a tool a lot (such as a color monitor or a keyboard) then it is worth spending more money for better quality.

ME

Michael:

Your suggestion about renting lenses is an excellent one. I'm going to check with my local dealer about rentals.

Paul

For a crop sensor Nikon like the D7000, I would look at the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, a Tokina 11-16, a Tamron 10-24 or the Sigma 8-16. All are very good and all but the Siggy 8-16 can use filters.

Cannot really go wrong with any of them.

I've used the Tokina 12-24 on my cropped sensor Nikon for a couple years now and still am amazed sometimes at its sharpness and excellent color contrast for the money. A couple minor nits though, in low light it focuses very slowly which is not unusual but significantly slower than any of my other lenses. Another minor irritant is the the hood is so wide it doesn't fit in lens case......go figure. However, I'd buy it again.

If you make huge prints the quality difference is a real issue. If you make smaller prints like 24 inches and less, not an issue. Web is irrelevant in the quality issue.

I've used the 12-24/4 DX lenses from Nikon and Tokina. I think the Tokina is excellent (sharpness, colors, build, whatever), but flare is a real problem with it. I've had so many shots ruined by massive flare (when shooting into the sun - sunset, sunrise...) that I ultimately sold it and got the Nikon, which does perform better in this regard.

Both the Tokina 11-16/2.6 DX and the Sigma 8-16 DC seem to be rather good choices, too, but I haven't used them.

I want to thank everyone that took time to reply. I decided to purchase the Tokina 11-16MM. I've taken a few shoots out in the head waters of the EverGlades this week and was very pleased with the results. If these first pictures are any indication of the lense's performance I think I'll look back and say that I made the right decision. If not, I'll be buying the Nikon 12-24MM.

Thanks again.

Paul

That's cool Paul. I'd appreciate any followups (and images) you can share over the next few months. That lens has been on my radar for quite a while--it's so unusual.

ME