Nikkor 10-24 vs Tokina 11-16

[e9coupeguy]

Tokina all the way. I was in the same boat as you last year. The Tokina 11-16 (and 12-24) are two if the best lenses you can get <$1000. Unbelievably sharp and fantastic build quality. The 11-16 is fast and the clarity is great but i end up putting the 12-24 on more often than not. More useable range (the 11-16 tends to be more of a 'specialty' lens) on the outside and almost as sharp - though not as fast. You can grab both for the $ of the Nikkor.

The setup i use Tok 11-26 / 12-24, Nik 24-70, Nik 80-200 with the Nik 50 prime. I'd like to pick up a nice fisheye and a macro but i think i've blown my photog budget for the next 5 years :-)...

Good luck with the lens! You'll love it

[e9coupeguy]

Originally Posted by InCityPhoto

You are going to have a lot of grain, shoot 2.8 with a external flash + defuser / in a box / bounced off something. And you will have much better photo's

The d700 at 1600 will only be an issue if you plan on enlarging the picture 400% or so. It is absurdely good in low light. Wish i had one.

[Jon D]

Originally Posted by The1

nice looking shots! is that an EF-S lens or EF? i assumed that was on a canon?

Thank you.
The lens is a Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM, not Canon, therefore the abbreviations you mention do not apply.
The camera was a Nikon D200; curious to know why you assume it was a Canon.

[InCityPhoto]

Originally Posted by Jon D

You appear to be unfamiliar with the lens - it's rectilinear and, therefore, does not cause straight lines to bend.
You also appear to be unaware of fairly recent quality improvements to Sigma lenses: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...&cat=37&page=3

My apologies.

I havent bought sigma since the two I bought were POS

[tolkino]

I did not like the tokina 11-16 on my DX body at all, I had to sell it when I switched over to FX. The lens had too much distortion for my liking, it was too wide that shooting people gave some weird affect to the photo. Personally I like Sigma 20mm f1.8, its fast and quite sharp, love the photos that come out of it.

[Ajax-Prime]

Originally Posted by tolkino

I did not like the tokina 11-16 on my DX body at all, I had to sell it when I switched over to FX. The lens had too much distortion for my liking, it was too wide that shooting people gave some weird affect to the photo. Personally I like Sigma 20mm f1.8, its fast and quite sharp, love the photos that come out of it.

Wow. Everything I have read, and the examples I have seen have led me to believe it it has less than the Nikkor.

I wasn't planning to use it on people per se, so I think I'm cool.

Think you might have gotten a bad one?

[InCityPhoto]

I have done a comparison on the Tokina = Canon Super Wide and the Tokina had less distortion.

[e9coupeguy]

Originally Posted by InCityPhoto

I have done a comparison on the Tokina = Canon Super Wide and the Tokina had less distortion.

Cant say that i tested it against canon, but i did compare it first hand to about every other lens in its class and it was the best of them in lack of distortion, clarity, and sharpness.

Agree that its a little too wide for portrait / people photography unless you are looking for an artistic effect. If you were going to use it for that i would go with the Tok 12-24. Its almost as good as the 11-16, just not as fast, but it is a constant f/4 and probably a better all purpose wide angle. However, the 11-16 is tough to beat at what it does.

[TL]

I shoot with a Tokina 11-16 and love it. Best ultra wide angle lens for the money IMHO.

here's a shoot with my tokina

[tolkino]

It is just way too wide, it could be good or bad. The surface of the glass is like a fish-eye, so portrait shots will look strange. If you are not going to use it for shooting people, then you will be fine. The lens is good with everything else. The distortion is more noticeable at the the widest end.

[InCityPhoto]

Originally Posted by tolkino

It is just way too wide, it could be good or bad. The surface of the glass is like a fish-eye, so portrait shots will look strange. If you are not going to use it for shooting people, then you will be fine. The lens is good with everything else. The distortion is more noticeable at the the widest end.

You should not be shooting portraits superwide anyways..

Use a 50mm 1.8

[Litos]

Originally Posted by InCityPhoto

You should not be shooting portraits superwide anyways..

Use a 50mm 1.8

or a 70-200 VRII

or an 85mm 1.8

[TL]

Originally Posted by Litos

or a 70-200 VRII

or an 85mm 1.8

also, 50mm f/1.4G or 80-200mm f/2.8

[M_Six]

Craigslist has one posted in your area, TL.

http://boston.craigslist.org/nos/pho/2247879759.html

[The1]

or

50mm 1.4

50mm 1.2

85mm 1.2

and you might be able to find an extension tube somewhere to make a 50 into about an 80mm or something if you really want to get technical.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by The1

or

50mm 1.4

50mm 1.2

85mm 1.2

and you might be able to find an extension tube somewhere to make a 50 into about an 80mm or something if you really want to get technical.

Was thinking about a 12mm extension to use the 50mm f1.4 as a pseudo-macro lens.

[The1]

can't hurt to try!!!

[TL]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Craigslist has one posted in your area, TL.

http://boston.craigslist.org/nos/pho/2247879759.html

yea i saw that Mark. it's also rare to see a Canon mount version.

[khaye1]

got a call from my local shop....it's here, will be pickin it up tomorrow morning!

[The1]

congrats!!!

[khaye1]

picked up the lens and couldn't resist the rs7 strap...so I got that too! we'll be goin out later to test out the new toy

[The1]

i suspect you'll be enjoying both of them immensely.

the shoulder strap is great when wandering around, especially since it's detatchable with a quick release, which makes it easy to take shots over your head and such.