Nikon wide angle

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mrkramer, Mar 30, 2008.

  1. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #1
    I'm wanting to buy a wide angle lens for my D70. I'm looking right now at this lens. I will probably mostly use it for landscapes, and maybe some indoors too. Is this a good lens or is there another one that I should be looking at too?
     
  2. disdat macrumors regular

    disdat

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Location:
    New England USA
    #2
    20mm isn't super super wide on a crop dSLR. I think Nikons have 1.5 crop factor, right? So, it would equal 30mm on your D70

    How wide do you want? If you want super super wide, check out something around 10mm.

    I have a 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron lens for my Canon XTi, and it isn't wide enough sometimes.

    I think I would like something like the 10-22mm. But then I don't know your actual needs.

    What lenses do you already have??
     
  3. Qianlong macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Location:
    .BE
    #3
  4. likeavaliant macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    #4
    i plan on purchasing the sigma 10-20 within the next couple months.
    i've tried a couple lenses out and that is my favorite by far.

    i'd advise against the 20mm you are looking at.
     
  5. mrkramer thread starter macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #5
    I may get the Nikon 12-24, I'll have to go down to a local camera shop and try one out.
     
  6. cutsman macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    #6
    I agree with the others. 20mm is definitely not very wide on a DX format Nikon. I would definitely go with an ultra-wide angle zoom... something like the Nikon 12-24, Tokina 12-24, Sigma 10-20, Tokina 11-16 (too new to tell exactly how it compares to the others), or the optically incredible Nikon 14-24 (maybe not wide enough...?).

    I have the Sigma 10-20 and I love it. I shoot at 10mm probably 90% of the time and the difference between 10mm and 12mm is really a lot greater than the 2mm would indicate.
     
  7. RaceTripper macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    #7
    It's about $900. The Tokina 12-24 is considered an excellent alternative at half the price.
     
  8. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #8
    A 20mm is certainly a wide angle- it's just not a super-wide. I shoot occasionally with a Nikkor 20-35mm and it's more than acceptable for lots of landscape images (and fantastic for stitching for panos.)

    A lot depends on what type of landscapes you shoot though.

    I also have the Sigma 10-20mm for when I want ultra-wide, but I find that while I shot a lot with the lens when I first got it, it's really too wide for a lot of landscape shots, especially if the sky doesn't have a lot of interesting clouds in it. I find myself using it primarily for shots where I can't back up to get the entire subject in, otherwise I find myself using it between 18 and 20mm a good portion of the time.

    Super-wides are like fisheyes, you tend to overshoot one when you first get it, then settle down to using it occasionally.
     
  9. cr2sh macrumors 68030

    cr2sh

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Location:
    downtown
    #9
    One lens you might try out is the older Sigma 12-24mm ultra-wide zoom. It's a full frame lens that wasn't designed for DSLR cameras, but still works. I have it and while it may be big and heavy, it also produces very nice images and was a steal for $399 brand new (clearance sale).
     
  10. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #10
    I need to 2nd this or 3rd or wherever we are in the lineup.
    I have the 10-20 and I love it. Minimal distortion at super wide and wide open. Some CR but then again that "some" was when I was looking straight into the sun wide open at 10mm. ;)
     
  11. eddx macrumors regular

    eddx

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #11
    According to all my research the Nikon 12-24mm isn't very good (the f2.8 version is but not the cheaper one). For your camera I would recommend the Sigma 10-20mm. I know a number of people who have been unhappy with the Nikon and ended up selling it for the Sigma.

    Why Nikon doesn't have a 10-20mm DX lens is a mystery.
     
  12. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #12
    Given that this runs against most everything I've read regarding the Nikon 12-24 f/4 lens, I think you need to provide some supporting evidence for this statement.

    The f/2.8 lens is a full-frame 14-24 BTW.
     
  13. pcypert macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Location:
    Bangkok
    #13
    I would take the Tokina 12-24 over the Nikon version any day of the week. I've owned and shot with both. Nikon is asking way too much for that lens. I'm Canon now, but shot Nikon for 10 years up until 2 years ago. I was much happier with the Tokina build, functionality, picture quality, etc.

    Paul
     
  14. Adrien Baker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    Bakersfield, Ca.
    #14
    I don't know where you got your research, but it's terribly incorrect. The Nikkor 12-24 is a very renowned lens in the Nikon world. Any serious time spent on a Nikon or serious Photography related forum will back this up.

    Adrien
     

Share This Page