Nikkor or Tokina wide angle? Ah, that is the question. However, I don't think there is any question. You do not get twice the benefits for paying twice as much for the Nikkor 12-24mm. I say, Tokina hit a home run with this glass. Nikkor or Tokina wide angle? Ah, that is the question. However, I don't think there is any question. You do not get twice the benefits for paying twice as much for the Nikkor 12-24mm. I say,... » Read More Nikkor or Tokina wide angle? Ah, that is the question. However, I don't think there is any question. You do not get twice the benefits for paying twice as much for the Nikkor 12-24mm. I say, Tokina hit a home run with this glass. « Show Less
330875
Perhaps Peter means the 18-200VR. Peter, the 12mm gives about 25-35% more viewing angle, to my eye.
330876
I have a Nikon 12-200 with the D200 camera. Do you think it is worth getting the Tokina 12-24 for the extra wide angle that it offers?
582400
i found its a better piece of glass and you will only need one lens for all scenarios. I was constantly switching from one kit lens to the other, now I ack one lens and im good to go in most scenarios. I sold my kit lenses and got a nice 50m 1.8 for portraits and use this 18-200 for all other instances.
2120275
I own both lenses, but the 12-40 (24-80 in 35mm terms) with its constant f2.8 aperture and 24mm viewing angle of 84º makes it more useful to me. Statistically and chart-wise, I'm certain the 12-40 would beat the 14-45, but I've found the latter to be quite competent when used. "Mind-blowing" would not be accurate. You'd be hard-pressed to see a visual difference (unless you're an extreme pixel-peeper).
41294
the angle-of-view has already been answered. Both lenses, in addition to the other M.Zuiko fixed focal-length lenses, offer more digital info than a human eye can resolve. I own the 12mm, 45mm and 75mm m. Zuikos as well as two Panasonic zooms. I can print beautiful 16 x 20 prints that are easily as "crisp" as files from my old Canon EOS system. I'm a retired photographer (44 yrs.)/photo instructor (29 yrs.) who the learned the craft in the darkroom, and made a relatively smooth transition to digital. In my studied opinion, pick the one that lets you capture an image the way "you see." The quality is there for both. Finally, both lenses at f/1.8 and f/2.0, offer essentially the same light-gathering ability. I would suggest the 12mm because it greatly increases your creative options with wide-angle. How you "see."
1773306
I have the Oly 45 and 75, and the panasonic 25 and 12. The 75 is regarded and one of the finest lens around, and its very sharp, but its $900, and the focal length isn't always practical. For the money, the 45mm is my favorite. Its inexpensive and very sharp. When you hold it in your hand, honestly, it looks a little cheep but the results are excellent.
1441507
i have the d80 with the 18-70 dx, the 70-300 ed, and the 50 1.8 d nikkors, plus the tokina 12-24 and the tamron 28-75 f/2.8. what glass you put on your d80 to start with should depend on intended uses and experience level. if all you want is an all-in-one lens, go for the 18-135 kit, unless you can afford the 18-200 vr. the 24-120 VR is another sweet after-market option if you go body-only and just want one lens, but you'd probably be better off, however, with either the 18-55 or the 18-70, plus the 55-200 vr. for the size, weight, and cost, they're very good for plastic consumer lenses. the downside is they're fairly slow for (D)SLR lenses, due to narrow apertures at the long end. if low-light photography or action sports is your bag, skip the nikkors altogether unless you can afford the 17-55 2.8 and/or the 70-200 VR. get the d80 body and grab a sigma or tamron 2.8. if w/a is your thing, i'd get one of the 18s (-55, -70, -135, -200) and pair it with the tokina 12-24 or the sigma 10-20. if you're more of a telephoto person, get the 18-55 or -70 and pair it with the inexpensive 70-300 non-vr g lens. the money you save over the ed or vr versions can go toward a good tripod -- unless you really think you're gonna be doing a lot of handheld shooting at 300mm. for macro and portrait work, consider again going body-only with the d80, getting the $100 50 1.8 prime, and maybe the sigma 30, the nikkor 60, and the tamron 90 to round out your selection, which would give you a nice, sharp range. if all of this seems too complicated, look at a fixed-zoom P&S or the d40/18-55 combo.
1594405
I have never used the 11-16 but did research it before buying this lens. I think you will be quite happy with either one and can't really go wrong. They are both sharp, excellent lenses. In my mind the principal trade off is whether you want a slightly wider angle view (there really is a pretty big difference btwn 12mm and 11mm) and a wider aperture or whether you want the extra versatility on the other end since the 12-28 lens goes up to 28mm. Pics are definitely usable at 28mm in my opinion. Ken Rockwell has a great review of both. The only thing I don't agree with him on with regards to the 12-28mm is that I am noticing some CA that I have to remove in post processing (not a big deal to me but worth noting). I will try to post a few sample pics later today. Hope that helps and happy shooting!
433204
I have both, but use the 50mm more (for portrait). Now that I have a tokina 11-16mm 2.8, 35mm won't be used as much, but I did get some good shoots from it.
1941236
Because a 10mm focal length lens is different from an 18mm focal length lens. Aperture, while important, is simply how much light the lens can let in (it affects depth of field as well); it has nothing to do with the angle and field of view of the lens. This lens and your lens should look very similar when they are both zoomed to the same focal lengths (18-24mm, the only focal lengths where they overlap). If you buy this lens and only use it from 18-24mm you are wasting your money. The reason people buy this lens for its extremely wide focal lengths (10-14mm). They give a perspective that cannot be gained in any other way, especially on DX. Few lenses get this wide and even less get this wide on DX. This is the only lens from Nikon that gets this wide on DX. That's why it's so expensive. Despite what someone else said, this is not a pro lens. I'm not sure any of the DX lenses are pro lenses. It is very much consumer grade quality; it has cheaper construction and more distortion. The Nikon 12-24mm is semi-pro (better, more durable construction) and is accordingly more expensive. But this one has a wider angle of view (shorter focal length), and that's what will be key to most folks. Just be careful with it and the distortion can be corrected with software.
794541
The 24mm because of the ED elements. The 35mm Nikkor skipped the ED elements and the result is occasional chromatic abberation which is quite annoying in a lens of that price. The 35mm Sigma Art series is nice but without the weather seal I would take a pass. Your other choice is the 24-70 f2.8 if you do not absolutely need the 1.4 large aperture. That gives you range and is pin sharp at 24mm and 35mm.
826202
I have the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and I used it on my D90. I purchased a D700 and it works great at 15mm and 16mm. Anything less there is vignetting. Incredible sharp lens, at least my copy.
1203850
yep. I am going to amend my advice and recommend the Tokina 11-16 2.8. This gets excellent reviews and is faster than the others for low light shooting such as UW. I shot with the 10-24 such subjects as a gilded church. It came out spectacular. All in all, if money is not an issue, it is a tossup between the nikon and tokina. I switched to fx format and now use the nikon 12-24. It's a monster. BTW, another great option for the Nikon DX is the great 18-200 zoom.
2123154
Hi Karen,I have used this lens on a D90,a D7000,and now on my D7100.It works great and is a super lens.It will no doubt cost more than the Tokina,but if you have the money go for the Nikon,I am sure you will not regret it.Enjoy anyway,whatever you buy.Regards. Len
2038042
go to nikonusa.com.. look at lenses you have the ability to check a box and compare lenes, side by side.. i love my 24-85...
296613
My guess is that the largest aperture with the tokina zoom @35mm is 2.8, versus 1.8 @35 mm with the Nikon. Also, this one is for a full frame camera (can also be used on a crop sensor)...Not sure if the Tokina is for both full frame or crop sensor. If it's just for a crop sensor you will get vignetting when placed on a full frame.
2227142
Of course every wide angle lens has "distortions" - but that means it lets parallel lines appear drifting apart when it's not completely at an angle. Of course it's fine for using inside rooms - if you can manage to get the rooms lit good enough. But that applies to all lenses. Wide angles have a wider depth of field as others lenses, so stopping down isn't necessarily needed.Both Nikon wide angle zooms are not only more expensive, they also feel less sturdy and their optical qualities aren't really better. Tilt-shift lenses for correcting parallel lines are rather for architecture specialists - those won't pay off for the use and purpose you have intended. I don't see why the Tokina should not work for you. Of course every wide angle lens has "distortions" - but that means it lets parallel lines appear drifting apart when it's not completely at an angle. Of course it's fine for using inside rooms - if you can manage to get the rooms lit good enough. But that applies to all lenses. Wide angles have a wider depth of field as others lenses, so stopping down isn't necessarily needed.Both Nikon wide angle zooms are not only more expensive, they also feel less sturdy and their optical qualities aren't really better. Tilt-shift lenses for correcting parallel lines... » Read More Of course every wide angle lens has "distortions" - but that means it lets parallel lines appear drifting apart when it's not completely at an angle. Of course it's fine for using inside rooms - if you can manage to get the rooms lit good enough. But that applies to all lenses. Wide angles have a wider depth of field as others lenses, so stopping down isn't necessarily needed.Both Nikon wide angle zooms are not only more expensive, they also feel less sturdy and their optical qualities aren't really better. Tilt-shift lenses for correcting parallel lines are rather for architecture specialists - those won't pay off for the use and purpose you have intended. I don't see why the Tokina should not work for you. « Show Less
1082258
Im not certain on the specifics, but from my personal experience, nikkor was a little bit slower than a 70-200 cannon i used recently. Not a great deal, but in high velocity sports it could be substantial. Sorry i cant be much help tho :)