Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Difference between this 2 lens

  1. #1
    Member crystal1993's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan, Tokyo
    Posts
    1,049

    Default Difference between this 2 lens

    Hi guys,

    Just wanna know the difference between AF-S DX NIKKOR 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED and AF-S DX 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED.

    Why is the 12-24mm one more expensive than the 10-24mm one. Is it because of the image quality or..?

    And which one should i go for? Lens is for pure landscape only.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    1. One lens is a constant-aperture design. These are more expensive generally.
    2. As for which is better, read a review, like on photozone.de
    Alpha

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,701

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    the ones you mentioned above are UWA (ultra-wide angled lens), they are normally use for landscape . . . But, there are people who use it for other purposes; even portraiture . . .
    Shot more cos digital is FREE !!!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,701

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    which one should you go for . . . depends on whether you want the 2mm extra wide vs constant aperture at f4 . . . considering the price difference as well . . .

    why dont you head down to NSC (Nikon Service Centre) to try the lens . . .
    at NSC, they will only recommend cos they don't sell it over there . . . so to me, it is a good place to try and not having a salesman to push for sales.
    Shot more cos digital is FREE !!!

  5. #5

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by crystal1993 View Post
    Hi guys,

    Just wanna know the difference between AF-S DX NIKKOR 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED and AF-S DX 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED.

    Why is the 12-24mm one more expensive than the 10-24mm one. Is it because of the image quality or..?

    And which one should i go for? Lens is for pure landscape only.
    Nikon came up with the 12-24 uwa first for the dx bodies and later the 10-24 to cover the 15-48 range in the full frame equivalent.

    You can check out these two kenrockwell reviews. (note: read them with a bucket of salt)
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-24mm.htm
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1224.htm
    Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif

  6. #6

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    there is a pretty good discussion on these 2 lenses in the nikon sub-forum.
    http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=718711

    There is a price difference but it is not really that much.
    Quote Originally Posted by huggable View Post
    Other than the 2mm, max aperture, and price differences, the 12-24 is an Internal Focus (IF) lens, while the 10-24 extends physically when zoomed out.
    Go for the 10-24 if the purpose to use UWA is to go widest. The Sigma 10-20mm is a decent choice too.
    Note that the 10-24 fov is 109-61
    and the 12-24 fov is 99-61

    The 10 degrees could means whether you can properly fit in all the buildings for a urban landscape photo.
    Last edited by coolthought; 12th November 2010 at 01:35 AM.
    Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif

  7. #7
    Member crystal1993's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan, Tokyo
    Posts
    1,049

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Alright after reading everything and googling for tons of comparison between this 2 lens, i heard of Tokina 11-16 and Sigma 10-20. Anybody owns this 2 lens can share with me whether is it good? So far between the 2 nikons i'm leaning towards to 10-24 side but i don't want to make a hasty decision.

  8. #8
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by crystal1993 View Post
    Alright after reading everything and googling for tons of comparison between this 2 lens, i heard of Tokina 11-16 and Sigma 10-20. Anybody owns this 2 lens can share with me whether is it good? So far between the 2 nikons i'm leaning towards to 10-24 side but i don't want to make a hasty decision.
    I use the Tokina 11-16. I find it very sharp, with good IQ. And it gives you constant F2.8 aperture, making it a fast UWA zoom. Very useful when taking ultra wide city or indoor images. The only down side is that it has a relatively short zoom range.

    You just can't win it all.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by crystal1993 View Post
    Alright after reading everything and googling for tons of comparison between this 2 lens, i heard of Tokina 11-16 and Sigma 10-20. Anybody owns this 2 lens can share with me whether is it good? So far between the 2 nikons i'm leaning towards to 10-24 side but i don't want to make a hasty decision.
    There are others threads in the pentax and canon sub-forum discussing about the sigma 10-20 and tamron 10-24.
    http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=794306
    http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=791418
    You can try searching the forum for more.
    I have seen some discussion on tokina 11-16 somewhere...
    Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif

  10. #10
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by crystal1993 View Post
    Alright after reading everything and googling for tons of comparison between this 2 lens, i heard of Tokina 11-16 and Sigma 10-20. Anybody owns this 2 lens can share with me whether is it good? So far between the 2 nikons i'm leaning towards to 10-24 side but i don't want to make a hasty decision.
    what's your budget though?

    10-24 is bit on the pricey side. If you're using a D5000 (as stated in your signature), then you do need to be mindful that only lenses with a built-in autofocus motor would give you AF capability with your camera. The AFS Nikkor 10-24 fits the bill. I think the Tokina 11-16 doesn't.
    Tokina's 12-24 f/4 has a 'II' version with a built in motor for Nikon. New price should be in the low 800s.
    Exploring! :)

  11. #11

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    You just can't win it all.
    I have to agree with this statement...
    Looking for a DX UWA can really be a headache

  12. #12
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffchanjj View Post
    I have to agree with this statement...
    Looking for a DX UWA can really be a headache
    Not really. I zoomed into the T11-16 pretty quick...

    Just that I had to sell my D40x and get a D90 to make it work with AF.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    Not really. I zoomed into the T11-16 pretty quick...

    Just that I had to sell my D40x and get a D90 to make it work with AF.
    Haha seems like if i go that route i need to dump my D60 too
    Anyway the T11-16 seems to perform quite well until it comes to flare right? (am i wrong to say that?)
    Would also like to ask if it'll vignette at the corners if you put a screw-on filter
    (nothing's better than 1st hand experience )

  14. #14
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffchanjj View Post
    Haha seems like if i go that route i need to dump my D60 too
    Anyway the T11-16 seems to perform quite well until it comes to flare right? (am i wrong to say that?)
    Would also like to ask if it'll vignette at the corners if you put a screw-on filter
    (nothing's better than 1st hand experience )
    Well, I find it ok leh...


  15. #15

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffchanjj View Post
    I have to agree with this statement...
    Looking for a DX UWA can really be a headache
    all these lenses are able to find the little niches to occupy in the uwa range. The differences between these lenses suit different needs of the photographer. Be it budget, sharpness, range, aperture, distortion, flare, etc.
    Last edited by coolthought; 12th November 2010 at 11:02 AM.
    Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif

  16. #16
    Member crystal1993's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan, Tokyo
    Posts
    1,049

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    what's your budget though?

    10-24 is bit on the pricey side. If you're using a D5000 (as stated in your signature), then you do need to be mindful that only lenses with a built-in autofocus motor would give you AF capability with your camera. The AFS Nikkor 10-24 fits the bill. I think the Tokina 11-16 doesn't.
    Tokina's 12-24 f/4 has a 'II' version with a built in motor for Nikon. New price should be in the low 800s.
    Wow i almost forgotten about the AF part. Thanks for reminding me. How could i miss such an important factor. Gahh!
    Alright will check out Tokina 12-24!
    And yup 10-24 is a bit on the pricey side but i would like to stick to original lens as much as possible. If really 3rd party lens cheaper and also better than the original lens of course i will get the 3rd party one instead. So any more recommendations? =D

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    Well, I find it ok leh...

    Wow that's a very nice picture. But tokina 11-16 doesn't have the AF motor yes?

  17. #17
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by crystal1993 View Post
    Wow i almost forgotten about the AF part. Thanks for reminding me. How could i miss such an important factor. Gahh!
    Alright will check out Tokina 12-24!
    And yup 10-24 is a bit on the pricey side but i would like to stick to original lens as much as possible. If really 3rd party lens cheaper and also better than the original lens of course i will get the 3rd party one instead. So any more recommendations? =D

    No harm to have this 'stick to manufacturer-brand lenses', if budget is of slightly lower concern. Me, I like to have maximum bang for buck, so 3rd party lenses always on the radar.

    Tokina 12-24 f/4 DXII is about 60+% of the Nikkor 12-24's price. And the Tokina is built like a tank. And I like the push-pull AF clutch mechanism.
    But you really need to try for yourself to be certain. Listen to advice but always formulate your own buying decision.

    * by the way, a lot of 'wow' images are only partly due to the lens. A lot of it comes from good composition, capturing at the right time, and probably also some fine-tuning in post-process.
    Exploring! :)

  18. #18

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by crystal1993 View Post
    Wow i almost forgotten about the AF part. Thanks for reminding me. How could i miss such an important factor. Gahh!
    Alright will check out Tokina 12-24!
    And yup 10-24 is a bit on the pricey side but i would like to stick to original lens as much as possible. If really 3rd party lens cheaper and also better than the original lens of course i will get the 3rd party one instead. So any more recommendations? =D
    what is your budget for an uwa? If it is more than 1300 then, no need to look around anymore. Just get the nikkor 10-24. Just remember the key difference between the 2 lenses are;
    For the 12-24 F4
    1. Constant aperture.
    2. Internal focus.
    PS. You have to read up on the sharpness, flare, distortion and how it performs from wide open to the smallest aperture and widest zoom to the narrowest.
    Last edited by coolthought; 12th November 2010 at 02:18 PM.
    Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif

  19. #19
    Member crystal1993's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan, Tokyo
    Posts
    1,049

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    No harm to have this 'stick to manufacturer-brand lenses', if budget is of slightly lower concern. Me, I like to have maximum bang for buck, so 3rd party lenses always on the radar.

    Tokina 12-24 f/4 DXII is about 60+% of the Nikkor 12-24's price. And the Tokina is built like a tank. And I like the push-pull AF clutch mechanism.
    But you really need to try for yourself to be certain. Listen to advice but always formulate your own buying decision.

    * by the way, a lot of 'wow' images are only partly due to the lens. A lot of it comes from good composition, capturing at the right time, and probably also some fine-tuning in post-process.
    Alright i will try out Tokina too! Thanks for the tip! And yes i agree with your last paragraph!

    Quote Originally Posted by coolthought View Post
    what is your budget for an uwa? If it is more than 1300 then, no need to look around anymore. Just get the nikkor 10-24. Just remember the key difference between the 2 lenses are;
    For the 12-24 F4
    1. Constant aperture.
    2. Internal focus.
    PS. You have to read up on the sharpness, flare, distortion and how it performs from wide open to the smallest aperture and widest zoom to the narrowest.
    For now no budget but of course if can get a cheap one the better. Yeah i read up quite a lot about the IQ, flare and distortion already. That's why i'm having 2nd thoughts on the 10-24 because of it's high distortion rate. But still i think it's inevitable among all UWA lens just that in the nikon 10-24 it's more obvious?

  20. #20

    Default Re: Difference between this 2 lens

    Quote Originally Posted by crystal1993 View Post
    For now no budget but of course if can get a cheap one the better. Yeah i read up quite a lot about the IQ, flare and distortion already. That's why i'm having 2nd thoughts on the 10-24 because of it's high distortion rate. But still i think it's inevitable among all UWA lens just that in the nikon 10-24 it's more obvious?
    All these are rectilinear lens and there will always be stretched corners at the widest. It will depend on how you manage it.
    Coolthought - 冷静思考 - クールだ http://xaa.xanga.com/0aba0666d143253.../t35917343.gif

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •