Who owns what and what's your opinion of it? I purchased the Tokina 11-16mm and have to admit that after all the research and patiently waiting for it, I'm a little disappointed. I'm probably returning it, but would still like to get into a wide angle and might try the Sigma 10-20mm. Whatever I buy will be for a Nikon platform - D90.
My brother has the Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 and I was really impressed with it. Really sharp and has little light fall off. It's a bit slow, but with a wide angle, you can get away with some really slow shutter speeds so it's not too bad.
I went with the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6. It's a full frame lens so it's crazy wide on my D3. It has significant light fall off and the corners are pretty soft. You've got to stop it down to F8 - F11 to get good results with it. But it's worth it to get 12mm on a full frame camera.
Sigma also has an 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC (which only covers a DX / APS-C frame) I haven't used it, but I would suspect the same light fall off and soft corners as my 12-24 on FX. But an 8mm non-fisheye lens is cool.
And if you've got the money - you can't beat the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 for image quality. I don't have the money right now, but someday.
Anyway - that's me just rambling. Why specifically didn't you like about the 11-16mm? That might help us give relevant lens recommendations.
@sudweeks In the end, it really comes down to the cost. The tokina is a great bargain, but I could save about $200 if I went with the Sig 10-20 4-5.6. I could debate lens speed, zoom range, etc, but I wonder if the Sig would generally create similar images for less money. For every 3 people that sing the Tokina's praise and claim poor quality control for Sig, there are 3 that can argue the other way....just feeling around I suppose.
@jcrowley40 Im using Nikon D90 and I have Tokina 11-16 currently, I sold my Sigma10-20 to buy Tokina and I have no regrets. I find the Tokina sharper and lesser distortion than the Sigma, and Tokina's f2.8 aperture really helps in dark situations. Maybe you can look into Sigma 8-16mm which is more wider.
I've wanted a super wide angle or fisheye lens for as long as I can remember. I recently took the plunge and bought a lensbaby scout with the fisheye lens for my Olympus E520.
I've always been a bit of a lens snob (if it ain't the sharpest thing known to man then it ain't good enough!) but as I'm doing more and more fine art type photography I've become more interested in equipment which gives me a more unusual look to set it apart from the rest.
The reason I mention this is because the lensbaby isn't super sharp, it vignettes like crazy at the edges and there is considerable chromatic abberation, its never going to give you a super sharp result that's a perfect rendition of what you saw, but that's not the point. Its a quirky lens for creating unusual, striking results, and its really really good at it, personally I love it.
It's manual focus only, you have to change the aperture by unscrewing the front of the lens and dropping in a different sized disc, it really is basic, but then its also cheap compared to a fisheye lens from anywhere else (£180) and has the added bonus of being able to accept other lensbaby lenses too (which are ridiculously cheap).
I bought it as I had some birthday money left over and I thought it might be worth a gamble (it was this or the Olympus 35mm Macro lens) and I'm so glad I did. It's so much fun to work with and I'd recommend it to anyone.
@bobg Good lens, great price. After taking delivery though, I started wondering if it would be worth getting the Sigma 8-16mm for roughly the same money (slower lens but even wider shots) or the Sigma 10-20mm for $200 less (slower lens with more range and slightly wider shot). I just about always question big money purchases after the fact, despite having researched the bejeesus out of this one. I have the 18mm capability on my kit lens, which makes for some fairly wide shots which then has me questioning the whole purchase as I type this! It seems I've become neurotic.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
I went with the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6. It's a full frame lens so it's crazy wide on my D3. It has significant light fall off and the corners are pretty soft. You've got to stop it down to F8 - F11 to get good results with it. But it's worth it to get 12mm on a full frame camera.
Sigma also has an 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC (which only covers a DX / APS-C frame) I haven't used it, but I would suspect the same light fall off and soft corners as my 12-24 on FX. But an 8mm non-fisheye lens is cool.
And if you've got the money - you can't beat the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 for image quality. I don't have the money right now, but someday.
Anyway - that's me just rambling. Why specifically didn't you like about the 11-16mm? That might help us give relevant lens recommendations.
I've always been a bit of a lens snob (if it ain't the sharpest thing known to man then it ain't good enough!) but as I'm doing more and more fine art type photography I've become more interested in equipment which gives me a more unusual look to set it apart from the rest.
The reason I mention this is because the lensbaby isn't super sharp, it vignettes like crazy at the edges and there is considerable chromatic abberation, its never going to give you a super sharp result that's a perfect rendition of what you saw, but that's not the point. Its a quirky lens for creating unusual, striking results, and its really really good at it, personally I love it.
It's manual focus only, you have to change the aperture by unscrewing the front of the lens and dropping in a different sized disc, it really is basic, but then its also cheap compared to a fisheye lens from anywhere else (£180) and has the added bonus of being able to accept other lensbaby lenses too (which are ridiculously cheap).
I bought it as I had some birthday money left over and I thought it might be worth a gamble (it was this or the Olympus 35mm Macro lens) and I'm so glad I did. It's so much fun to work with and I'd recommend it to anyone.
Nick
@jcrowley40