Tokina 10-17 on D800 - how useful?

Anyone tried using the Tokina 10-17 on a D800 in DX crop? Is the reduced viewfinder a pain? Or would I be better off using a Sigma fisheye and cropping...?

Advice welcome!

Having read lots on here, it appears that that the sigma 15mm is the way to go.

Tokina 10-17 on a D800 in DX crop?

Isn't that like putting a wooden block beneath the accelerator pedal of a BMW?

Would be interesting to compare the same image using the Tokina 10-17mm in Dx mode in the D800, Sigma 15mm FE and D800, and also the Tokina 10-17mm with the D7000. On paper there is a difference but what is it really like at the end of the day side by side?

It could be like comparing a block of wood under the accelerator of a BMW M3 and unblocked accelerator BMW M3 but driving them both in busy streets of Bangkok?

Would be interesting to compare the same image using the Tokina 10-17mm in Dx mode in the D800, Sigma 15mm FE and D800, and also the Tokina 10-17mm with the D7000. On paper there is a difference but what is it really like at the end of the day side by side?

 

It could be like comparing a block of wood under the accelerator of a BMW M3 and unblocked accelerator BMW M3 but driving them both in busy streets of Bangkok?

I would be interested in this side by side comparison as well. Did anybody already do this?

I have actually tried this topside. But not underwater... When I got my D800 and Sigma 15mm I used tripod and compared against a wall and also against flowers. I tested sigma in 15mm in FX mode, and the Tokina in both DX mode and also in zoomed in FX mode. My results...

First impression is, not so much diffrent. But when you zoom in, there is actually BIG diffrent! Against the wall I could see details in the sigma that not the tokina good show. My results is that I now have sold the tokina....

But, for the most use I will honest say that the Tokina is more than you often need. I have been taken pictures with the Tokina that I really love. Its a very good lens and I have been used it with D80, D300s.

For me upgrading to FX was mostly that I needed a new challange in photo. Somehow I use the camera much more right now, both topside and underwater. I needed something new, and when it comes to quality from the D800 I can see really different! But the D300s felt more save and easy somehow. But anyway, its diffrents between this two lenses.

One would expect that there would be a big difference when zooming in as the FX file size is 36mp vs 15mp in Dx mode. To get a good comparison I think you need to shoot the D800 with Sigma 15mm and then D800 in DX mode with Tokina 10-17mm and the D7000 with Tokina 10-17mm and resize all images down to the Dx mode size of the D800 which is about 15mp (thats also resizing the D7000 down from 16.2mp). Posting those photos side by side for comparison would give one an idea of which combination is useful for different people.

Is the 15mm Sigma on the D800 in FF better quality at 15mp than the D800 Dx cropped with the Tokina 10-17mm at 15mp? How does the D7000 compare to them both at 15mp? Is the 15mm Sigma really required for those that will not print billboard size?

It would be an interesting real life comparison than compared to the on paper rave about the new latest and greatest.

Regards Mark

I sold my lovely Tokina 10-17 with which I had made a great many beutifully sharp pictures on DX. However, that was then and the 15 Sigma on FX gives me strategy when it comes to working my pictures alongside type. You may not need that. In fact most people don't need anything that gives a 72dpi picture across a screen of 40 inches!

Bit what has that got to do with the price of eggs? WE all have things with performance we don't need. The UK has an overall speed limit of 70mph but we all buy cars that will do 130mph!

John can you notice the difference between a image printed in a magazine taken at 10mm with the Tokina 10-17mm and DX camera and a image taken with the Sigma 15mm FE with a FF camera?

I guess we can compare cars against cameras and of course we all have things with performance we dont need or use. I am asking along the lines of what are the performance of cars at the the speeds we drive them everyday and not the top end speed which only some might achieve at the race track once in a blue moon?

The point is that alot of people including myself are holding off going FF with something like the Nikon D800 because no one has compared the performance of the Sigma 15mm FE with the perfomance and verstaility Tokina 10-17mm on a Dx mode/camera.

The only selling point is the 36mp top end speed of the Nikon D800 when used with the 15mm Sigma.

Aussiebyron,

I was really hesitating when I was planing to change camera. Did I really need D800? Was the diffrent in quality big? To be honest i don´t think you see so much diffrent on a PC screen. But when you work with the pictures and scale them to diffrent sizes and so on the D800 really makes diffrent. If you only shoot and print more or less straight from camera I don´t think the diffrent is huge. But as I told you, if you work with them. Spec what details you can get from over or under exposed areas. I like creativ sizing of pictures in magazine´s so for me D800 is just so COOL camera! But there are also downsides....

I have tested the 15mm Sigma with D700 and I see a big problem of sharpness on the border of the images. The 16mm Nikon and the 10,5mm Nikon are in an other level.

Cristian.

That's interesting Cristian. I sold both my 10.5 and 16 Nikkors because I never used them. Always Tokina 10-17 and Sigma 15. I think it depends very much on your dome set-up. I get fantastic edge-to-edge sharpness. In fact only today I saw a full-page layout using a small side section of one of my pics.

I use the Sigma 15mm on my D800 and the Hugyfot minidome and see no corner softness at f/stops above 5,6.

To have the perfect corner sharpness at all f/stops you would need a dome made especially for the Sigma 15,mm or whatever other lens having

the perfect curvature of the dome for the given lens.

Corner sharpness depends of the combination dome and lens and using a higher f/stop can eliminate small issues with corner softness due the deeper field of view.

Chris

Aussiebyron,

 

I was really hesitating when I was planing to change camera. Did I really need D800? Was the diffrent in quality big? To be honest i don´t think you see so much diffrent on a PC screen. But when you work with the pictures and scale them to diffrent sizes and so on the D800 really makes diffrent. If you only shoot and print more or less straight from camera I don´t think the diffrent is huge. But as I told you, if you work with them. Spec what details you can get from over or under exposed areas. I like creativ sizing of pictures in magazine´s so for me D800 is just so COOL camera! But there are also downsides....

Kmsellin,

At what scale do you start seeing the difference (largest image printed with D800 vs largest image with a Dx)? What sizing for magazines does the cool D800 do which a DX camera like the D7000 can't do?

Regards Mark

I guess what I am looking for is a comparison of the Sigma 15mm FE and the Tokina 10-17mm before I bite the bullet and go from DX to FF. Yes having 36mp image size with the latest and greatest camera sounds the way to go but thats only half the story. The other half is how good is the 15mm Sigma when your not shooting 36pm billboard size stuff and how does it compare when you use the Tokina 10-17mm in the D800 Dx mode.

Can anyone take some test photos with both lenses on the D800 to get an visual comparison. The Sigma 15mm imaged resized to 15mp and the Tokina 10-17mm in Dx mode.

Regards Mark

I bet that in practise you wouldn't see a difference, hence the sudden popularity of 4:3 cameras. I haven't used the cameras side-by-side. I always took one or the other on a dive trip. However, the cover of this month's Diver Magazine is very woolly because I took a picture with a D200 (DX) for one use and to my surprise the art director cropped a tiny part of the background to use as a main shot for an entirely different use. If I had shot it on the D800 (FX) it would have been a million times better!

The first shot was intended for a Travel Guide and took into consideration Masthead and Cover lines. The second is the cover of Diver Mag this month!

If you are responsible for cropping your own pictures (and deciding their use when you take them) you would not have this problem!

So for me, the D800 with sigma 15 enables me to shoot material under water that can be cropped into 'different pictures' later!

That's interesting Cristian. I sold both my 10.5 and 16 Nikkors because I never used them. Always Tokina 10-17 and Sigma 15. I think it depends very much on your dome set-up. I get fantastic edge-to-edge sharpness. In fact only today I saw a full-page layout using a small side section of one of my pics.

John, I have tested the Sigma 15mm on land, in a mine shooting and at the the minimum distance, the lens that I have used was terrible on the border of the image, this is one of the images (nef file) develop with captureNX2:

http://www.immaginephoto.it/temp/_70A8012.jpg

I hope the Nikon make a 16mm like the 10,5mm.

Cristian.

Maybe you got a 'bad' one. It looks like a DOF problem. What F/stop were you using and what were the relative distances?

Can I direct to http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46334&st=0

Maybe you got a 'bad' one. It looks like a DOF problem. What F/stop were you using and what were the relative distances?

 

Can I direct to http://wetpixel.com/...opic=46334&st=0

The lens that I have tested, it's not mine.

I have used f8 1/125 @ 200iso at the minimum distance that permit the 15mm Sigma. In similar situation of shoot the 10,5mm Nikon with D80 and D800 work better.

Cristian.

The lens that I have tested, it's not mine.

I have used f8 1/125 @ 200iso at the minimum distance that permit the 15mm Sigma. In similar situation of shoot the 10,5mm Nikon with D80 and D800 work better.

 

Cristian.

Well with the D800 you can safely use ISO 3600 and a smaller f/stop/faster shutter-speed. Maybe that's where the problem lies.