Opinions on First Wide Angle Lens??

Hello,

I just sold my old car and have some cash in my pocket!! I am looking to get my first wide angle lens for my D90 and would like opinions on which would be best.

The following are within my budget:

Nikon 10.5

Tokina 10-17

Tokina 12-24

The pricing on the Tokinas are attractive however I dont want a lens that will produce lower quality images and I am a little wary of them.

I would appreciate your opinions.

Cheers,

John

I'd vote for the Tokina 10-17 John. It equates to a 15mm - 25mm on your D90.

You can check out my images on the links in my signature. All the W/A were taken with the 10-17 on a Canon 1.6 crop frame body

Cheers,

Steve

I'd vote for the Tokina 10-17 John. It equates to a 15mm - 25mm on your D90.

You can check out my images on the links in my signature. All the W/A were taken with the 10-17 on a Canon 1.6 crop frame body

 

Cheers,

Steve

I totally agree with Steve. The tokina optically behind a good dome will get you exceptional quality shots. The Nikon 10.5 is also very nice but for me (not that I shoot much WA) the Tokina is very very nice.

Bill

Hi, No doubt Tokina 10-17 u can count on. Happy dive n shoot. :-)

If you want the most flexible lens (along with the ability to take flexibly poor pictures by zooming rather than by getting close) the Tokina 10-17mm is the one. I'd recommend the Nikon 10.5mm for it's lack of flexibility, superb optical design and better aperture. And I'm naturally contrary...

Tim

Thanks for the responses, I am gonna get the Tokina 10-17 with the Aquatica 4 inch glass dome. The pictures I have seen from this system look good.

Cheers,

John

Thanks for the responses, I am gonna get the Tokina 10-17 with the Aquatica 4 inch glass dome. The pictures I have seen from this system look good.

 

Cheers,

John

Many people seem to love the Tokina 10-17 (it is reasonably priced for the quality), but I would also recommend a Nikkor 12-24; there may be times when you simply don't want the fisheye effect. I carry the 12-24 and a 10.5 fisheye, so I have options on my trips (just remove the port spacer ring for the 12-24 setup).

Cheers

Many people seem to love the Tokina 10-17 (it is reasonably priced for the quality), but I would also recommend a Nikkor 12-24; there may be times when you simply don't want the fisheye effect. I carry the 12-24 and a 10.5 fisheye, so I have options on my trips (just remove the port spacer ring for the 12-24 setup).

Cheers

I am gradually building up my kit and at the moment it feels like I am buying too much and diving too little!! I looked at the Nikkor 12-24 and there was also a price consideration at the end of the day.

My 4 inch port and 10-17 lens are on their way!!

Btw what port do you use with your 12-24?

Cheers

The Nikon 12-24mm is not a good performer underwater, except in a large (and unwieldy) dome port. It has very soft edges and encourages you to sit back from the fish in the "blah" zone, where strobe illumination falls off. It's OK for divers, turtles and groupers, but not for bigger or smaller animals, except, perhaps, sharks that won't come in very close.

Tim

i have the 10.5mm and i love the lens and even more so with a teleconverter - however i am looking to get the 10-17mm as i believe that with the TC and the zoom it will help me to get the shots that i want due to flexibility.

Hello from Greece,I am looking also for a wide lens for my Nikon D700.

I read about Nikon 16mm 2.8 and Sigma 15mm 2.8.

What you think is the best for underwater photography?Also I love half sea-half out of the sea

pictures and I would like to take this kind of pictures...

Thank you,Giannis.

I read about Nikon 16mm 2.8 and Sigma 15mm 2.8.

What you think is the best for underwater photography?Also I love half sea-half out of the sea

pictures and I would like to take this kind of pictures...

The two lenses are similar but, as I recall, the Sigma focuses closer than the 16mm 2.8. At one time, I believe it was preferred by Alex Mustard to the Nikon 16mm. But don't quote me on that!

I used to own the 16mm 2.8 and I sold it. It's the one lens I sold that I really regret selling! Also, the over/under shots I've captured were shot with the Nikon 16mm 2.8. It worked great for over/unders with my big dome lens.

You probably can't go wrong with either lens, but do remember that the Sigma will focus a little closer.

That's my two cents. Happy shooting!

Ellen

Thanks a lot Ellen for your reply,so we have Sigma Vs Nikon 1-0.

I would like to have some other opinions as well before spending my money...

Please if anyone else has these lenses,I would like to have your opinion.

Absolutely the Sigma 15mm over the Nikon 16mm. I have both, though intend to sell the 16mm. It just doesn't focus close enough UW, to a very noticeable degree. Did a couple dives with it and went out and bought the sigma.

Actually, wait, I lie...... the 16mm is better...... wanna buy mine??

Also, for over/under shots, the bigger the dome the better. At least 8".

I shot with a Canon, so no background on Nikon lenses, but I have had only disappointing results with Sigma. The optical quality is ok to good, but the mechanical quality is rather poor. I do a lot of desert hiking and off-roading and all my Sigma lenses died of mechanical failures while all my other lenses continue to work. Maybe I had bad luck or just don't pay enough attention to my gear, but I won't buy another Sigma.

I have both the the Nikon 12-24 and the Tokina 10-17. I like them both a lot. I shoot wrecks here in the Great Lakes, and the 10-17 is great. I rented a Nikon 10.5 FE which was a nice lens, but a little zoom is handy now and again.

Because the 12-24 is a rectilinear lens, the "12" on the two lenses are not even remotely the same coverage.

I don't disagree that the 12-24 can be a little fuzzy around the edges, but not much. I suspect some people shoot with the wrong extension ring... I do, simply because I just have too much cr*p to carry!

If I was just buying one lens... it would be the Tokina. (It doesn't hurt that a friend is a dealer, so I can get them at "cost plus a beer"!