Advice on buying a cheap(<1K) wide angle zoom for a Nikon APS-C body


hmmm... very good advise from of of u guys.. reali appreicated it alot.
 

ZerocoolAstra said:
I personally feel that the Toki 11-16 is sharper than the Nikon 10-24. I also prefer the solid build and the AF clutch ring.
If it was my choice between these 3 lenses, I'd take the Toki in a heartbeat... doesn't hurt that it's also the cheapest of the 3 ;)

The price of the 10-24mm (nikon) doesn't justify when cheaper and equally capabilities (or better) lenses are out there.
 

Thanks a lot for all the grate feedback! you guys rock! :)

I think i'll be going for the tokina 11-16. Would like to get the sigma (because its a bit cheaper :D and its 10mm) but i read that its a bit softer than the tokina. So i think the tokina is the choice here.

However i still have a bit of a hard time deciding whether i should go for the Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX or the 11-16?

Its hard (as i have never used any UWA lens before...) for me to imagine the difference between 11m and 12mm. but from what you guys are saying and whats said on the web by many, i believe the 11-16 is sharper and has a better build quality.

PS:
To give you some more information about my gear, i use a D5100 body. And own the kit lens (18-55) and 50mm 1.8 AF-D prime. Don't think i will upgrade my body anytime soon. So i will be on DX for the foreseeable future.

Thanks again for all the helpful responses.
 

tuxwithacamera said:
Thanks a lot for all the grate feedback! you guys rock! :)

I think i'll be going for the tokina 11-16. Would like to get the sigma (because its a bit cheaper :D and its 10mm) but i read that its a bit softer than the tokina. So i think the tokina is the choice here.

However i still have a bit of a hard time deciding whether i should go for the Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX or the 11-16?

Its hard (as i have never used any UWA lens before...) for me to imagine the difference between 11m and 12mm. but from what you guys are saying and whats said on the web by many, i believe the 11-16 is sharper and has a better build quality.

PS:
To give you some more information about my gear, i use a D5100 body. And own the kit lens (18-55) and 50mm 1.8 AF-D prime. Don't think i will upgrade my body anytime soon. So i will be on DX for the foreseeable future.

Thanks again for all the helpful responses.

Good choice, just don't panic when u cannot AF, it's like that de.
 

Cowseye said:
Good choice, just don't panic when u cannot AF, it's like that de.

Not sure abt 11-16, but Tokina 12-24 has a version2 w a BIM. So it can AF with the motorless bodies. Unfortunately it costs more. Haven't really noticed any on sale on BnS, not that I've been looking hard ;)
 

Good choice, just don't panic when u cannot AF, it's like that de.
hmm not sure about this but i thought 11-16 have BIM as its a DX lens?

EDIT: my bad, it probably don't have a BIM.

If you want an ultrawide zoom for your Nikon DX DSLR, this is my top suggestion as of 2008. (For the D40, D40x or D60, you still need the Nikkor 12-24mm for autofocus, and for Canon, I'd get the excellent Canon 10-22mm.) - http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm
 

Last edited:
AF is something I can forgo for UWA. But still, it's up to you. Take my words with a pinch of salt.
 

Not sure abt 11-16, but Tokina 12-24 has a version2 w a BIM. So it can AF with the motorless bodies. Unfortunately it costs more. Haven't really noticed any on sale on BnS, not that I've been looking hard ;)

Really... Mmm... need to do more research on the Tokina 12-24mm.. thanks for the information...:)
 

AF is something I can forgo for UWA. But still, it's up to you. Take my words with a pinch of salt.
I usually do MF with my kit lens if i am taking a landscape/arch shot. So i think it won't be a problem. but i miss AF on my 50mm.
 

I usually do MF with my kit lens if i am taking a landscape/arch shot. So i think it won't be a problem. but i miss AF on my 50mm.

UWA use is not limited to landscapes, what if you want the AF for other shoots?
 

spree86 said:
UWA use is not limited to landscapes, what if you want the AF for other shoots?

I'll apply the same hyper focusing method if I need all in focus, or else just guessimate, at such short focal length, it's a little hard to get foreground not in focus even at F/2.8.
 

UWA use is not limited to landscapes, what if you want the AF for other shoots?
Never really thought much about it. But i guess i would be doing what i do with my 50mm AF-D. I use the live view and do the focusing manually. But it takes me about 30 - 60 sec to do this, which sucks because sometimes the subject moves away :)

However, i decided on buying a UWA to overcome the limitations i face when i am shooting landscapes/arch.

Do you guys have any tips for manual focusing?
 

tuxwithacamera said:
Never really thought much about it. But i guess i would be doing what i do with my 50mm AF-D. I use the live view and do the focusing manually. But it takes me about 30 - 60 sec to do this, which sucks because sometimes the subject moves away :)

However, i decided on buying a UWA to overcome the limitations i face when i am shooting landscapes/arch.

Do you guys have any tips for manual focusing?

DD123 wrote a wonderful article on hyper focusing. Try searching his posts you should be able to find one. Or wait for him to pop by this thread
 

Never really thought much about it. But i guess i would be doing what i do with my 50mm AF-D. I use the live view and do the focusing manually. But it takes me about 30 - 60 sec to do this, which sucks because sometimes the subject moves away :)

However, i decided on buying a UWA to overcome the limitations i face when i am shooting landscapes/arch.

Do you guys have any tips for manual focusing?




Thanks guys! will check it out.
 

Back
Top