New lenses to lust for - for DSLR's

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Chip NoVaMac, May 1, 2006.

  1. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #1
    I already have the Tokina 12-24, and I find it to be a well corrected lens and sharp. Built IMO better than the Nikon 12-24. So these new offering should be interesting: http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tokina_PIE2006.html

    I have heard rumors that Tamron is going to offer a 50-150 range f2.8 zoom this fall. So I might just wait.

    Yes, I have the Nikon 18-200VR that I am very happy with it. It is a great travel lens. Yet I have been wanting to get some faster lenses though. I like DOF control. Looks like the DSLR has finally matured for some great 3rd party offerings.
     
  2. kugino macrumors 65816

    kugino

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    #2
    none of those new lenses interest me...but i might check out the tokina 12-24 you have...i have the nikon 18-200VR on order (who knows when i'll get it) so the 12-24 would round out my needs...
     
  3. Wes Jordan macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    #3
    Well I shoot with Canon and right now I am lusting over several lens. Mainly I want a 70-200mm f/2.8L and a 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5. Those are amazing lenses!
     
  4. javabear90 macrumors 6502a

    javabear90

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2003
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #4
    If you do many sports, check out the 70-200mm VR. It is a fabulous lens
    On anohter topic,
    I am going to get an ultra wide zoom for my D200. Have you used the sigma 10-20mm before or the Nikon? It seems that the sigma might be a better deal than the tokina / tamron / nikon because it goes wider and is smaller for travel. Anyone have any thoughts?
    Thanks,
    -Ted
     
  5. Rocky3478 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    #5
    I've used the Nikon 12-24 once on my D70 and man, was that a sweet lens! :) Heartily recommended. It was so wide that I was even getting my own shadow from the sun in the picture at 10 o'clock in the morning... :rolleyes: :D
     
  6. jared_kipe macrumors 68030

    jared_kipe

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #6
    Why wait? Sigma has a 10-20mm I ordered it last night, it shall be here thursday. I had a breif stint with a Sigma 17-35mm here is my review of it. And thought, why settle for a 28mm wide end when I could get a 16mm wide end. Its gonna be sweet. I'll probably have to modify my testing for its wide angleness.

    EDIT: Oh and that lens and some others I reviewed at the same time are on ebay now along with some other stuff http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZjared_kipeQQhtZ-1
     
  7. Chip NoVaMac thread starter macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #7
    I have used the Tokina 12-24 on both Canons and Nikons, and could not be happier.
     
  8. ksz macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    #8
    If Tokina's new 16-50 f/2.8 and 50-135 f/2.8 are designed by the same team to the same or better standards as the team that developed the 12-24 f/4, then we're in for some good times.
     
  9. Chip NoVaMac thread starter macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #9
    That is my thinking. We already know about the Tamron 17-50. Just have to wait and see what they offer on the telephoto end. I hope with some with an overlap and a truly matched tele converter.
     
  10. kugino macrumors 65816

    kugino

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    #10
    so i take it you guys like the tokina 12-24? at half the price of the nikon it seems like a great deal...as a very amateur photographer i probably wouldn't notice the difference b/n the tokina and the nikon, right? my hobbies are waaaay too expensive :(
     
  11. ksz macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    #11
    There you go, the difference between men and boys is the price of their toys. ;)
     
  12. brett33 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Waco, TX
    #12
    If we are truly talking about the lenses that I'm longing for, but don't really think that I'll get anytime soon.

    Canon Lenses
    85mm f/1.2L (okay, I might get that one)
    50mm f/1.0L
    200mm f/1.8L
    1200mm f/5.6L

    Contax Zeiss
    21mm f/2.8 with adapter for Canon
     
  13. pedrov macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    #13

    chip. so you thinks the 12-24 tokina is better lens?

    i am thinging of moving to nikon d200 for shooting and have chance to return my 12-24 for $1000 credit. i want to replace with other len, and tokina 12-24 has me looking. it looks almost same as nikon 12-24.

    thanks you for advising!
     
  14. jared_kipe macrumors 68030

    jared_kipe

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #14
    Man I wouldn't want the 1200mm (other than to sell off) they're so damn big they are not useful for anything.
     
  15. Clix Pix macrumors demi-goddess

    Clix Pix

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    8 miles from the Apple Store at Tysons (VA)
    #15
    I recently was able to buy a legendary lens, the Noct-Nikkor f/1.2..... That has satiated my lens lust for a while! LOL! However, I'm still waiting for the 105 VR, which I'm on a list for at my local camera shop and one day I'd like to take a look at the 200mm f/2, although I suspect that lens will be too large and heavy for me to actually carry and use. The only other lens I am lusting after is the 28mm f/1.4, which apparently has been discontinued but I'm told by someone on Nikon Cafe may be made available again soon...
     
  16. whocares macrumors 65816

    whocares

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    :noitаɔo˩
    #16
    Nikkor AF-S 18-200, cause I'm lazy.

    Runner-up; AF-S 12-25.
     
  17. Chip NoVaMac thread starter macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #17
    Just feel that it has a better build quality about it. With a lens like this I see no need for AF-S focusing. Just my two cents.

    IIRC Canon has stopped production, as it were - each was built to order, of this monster lens.
     
  18. jared_kipe macrumors 68030

    jared_kipe

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #18
    Yeah I know Sports Illustrated and National Geo have a few copies, and of course there is Canon Professional Services that has one or two to rent out.
     
  19. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #19
    I've tried on the Nikkor 12-24mm (granted, not for long), and my Tokina seems much better --- better in terms of build (not even questionable), but seeing as how the reviews I've read on the Tokina 12-24mm either say that the Tokina is as good, or almost as good as the Nikkor, which is super. Given the option of having the Tokina or Nikon for free, I'd still go for the Tokina right now.

    I want the Nikkor 18-200 mm VR as well, but I'd probably be just as happy, or maybe even more so, with a 50-135(or 150) mm f/2.8. Do I need to shoot at 200 mm?

    Also, a 105 mm f/2.8 would be nice, or even a 85 mm f/1.8. Both are a modest goal.

    My next 2 lens purchases will probably be one of these primes, and one of the telephoto lenses I mentioned (since I don't have one, although to tell you the truth, I have rarely missed having one).
     
  20. law guy macrumors 6502a

    law guy

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Location:
    Western Massachusetts
    #20
    Hmm. I've heard good things about the sharpness of the Tamron 28-75 2.8 - Bob Atkins had a good review, and others I read concurred. I may check it out - the price is certainly right.

    Ah, but if price were not the issue:

    Canon 24-105 f4 L IS as a general walk-around.
    Canon 16-35 f2.8 L at the wide end
    Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS (although if money were no object - and since I'm dreaming about the 2.8 it must not be - I'd also like the 70-200 f4 L for the low weight)
    and a 100-400.

    The lense I'd like most in that round-up is the 24-105. Just a little too expensive for me to justify, but the most versital. Michael Reichmann on the http://www.luminous-landscape.com/ site has a nice review and several great shots from the antartic http://www.luminous-landscape.com/locations/antarctica.shtml and china http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/china-street.shtml with that lens on a 5D.

    My more "realistic" budget dream lenses right now are the 24-105 (around $1200) and the 70-200 f4L (which with rebate is under $600! and the big L bargain these days).

    Oh, but I can dream.
     
  21. Mike Teezie macrumors 68020

    Mike Teezie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    #21
    Finally, a lens lust thread!

    I just got the 70-200mm 2.8L IS about a month ago. With my telephoto end more than covered, of course I'm lusting after a nice wide angle option now.

    I have two plans.

    Plan 1 - Acquire the 16-35 2.8L, and keep using my Tamron 28-75 2.8 for mid-range zoom. Total cost - about $1400.00.

    Plan 2 - Sell the Tamron and try to get around $300 for it. Pick up a 24-70 2.8L, and also a Tokina 12-24. Total cost - about $1200.

    I'm heavily leaning towards plan 2, as I've read rave reviews about the Tokina. And I'll use the mid range zoom more anyway - where the L glass versus the 3rd party glass should be more apparent.

    What can I say, El Gigante(my 70-200 2.8 IS) gave me a fever, and the only cure is more L glass.
     
  22. Chip NoVaMac thread starter macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #22
    Actually the reviews place the Tamron very close to the Canon 24-70L. If you can find a place to rent one and see for yourself.

    Plan 3 - Acquire the Tokina 12-24 keep using your Tamron 28-75 2.8 for mid-range zoom. Total cost - about $500.00.

    For it sounds like there is little need for fast in the wide angle end.
     
  23. law guy macrumors 6502a

    law guy

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Location:
    Western Massachusetts
    #23
    Chip - this is odd, you've got Mike's post but it says it's a law guy post. :confused:
     
  24. NinjaMonkey macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Location:
    Maryland
    #24
    I just bought an Olympus 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 lens.

    I'm currently lusting for the 50mm macro and 50-200mm Zuiko lenses.
     
  25. Jeromie macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    #25
    My current SLR is not digital. Can I still play?

    I'd really like the Canon 100mm/2.8 USM macro lens. I've only got a couple of lenses at the moment (50/1.8 and 28/2.8), and while there are enough photographic possibilities to last the rest of my life with those two focal lengths alone, a lens that would allow me to explore the world of little things while simultaneously adding a little bit of reach to my camera bag would be fantastic.

    In my ideal world, I'd acquire this lens before heading to Costa Rica for my honeymoon (in June). I'm not sure if it's in the budget, though. We'll see.
     

Share This Page