wide angle lenses


Status
Not open for further replies.
Dec 2, 2007
165
0
16
Singapore
#1
hi bros out there,
anyone has any suggestions bout good third party wide angle lenses?
 

DonnyDan

New Member
Dec 4, 2009
231
0
0
30
#2
There are lots of article regarding this topic. Do some research on it.

I recommend Tokina 11-16 for you and your D90.
 

fergo

New Member
Mar 19, 2007
185
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#3
im looking for WA lenses too. been researching and asking around.
just to share with you,

many recommend Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 and Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6. havent gotten much review on Nikon's 10-24mm.

i find it hard to choose which to get. each have their pros and cons.

Tokina - its a f2.8! but limited range.
Sigma - f4. slow lens. but many say you're not gonna use as an action lens etc. price is good.
Nikon - expensive but has a wide zoom range.

conclusion for me, i prob go for Tokina or Sigma. budget problem. :bsmilie:
on top of that, im thinking of getting a standard zoom to go along with it. either Sigma's 17-70mm f2.8 or Tokina's 16-50mm f2.8.

Gurus out there.. pls advice. thank you!
 

gibss

New Member
Nov 17, 2009
506
0
0
#4
Well, there's the path not often travelled.

Zenitar 16mm f2.8
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=zenitar+16mm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/zenit/zenitar-16mm.htm
Don't worry about those QC issues, I got mine a month ago, and it is able to reach infinity focus.
It's soft at f2.8, but really sharp once you hit f4 onwards.
Costs $300 flat, got it over eBay.

Just to give you an idea of how wide 16mm is on a cropped sensor.

| Changi Beach, f22, 1/60, ISO400 |

There's the Peleng 8mm too, but be wary of the image quality.

Happy Researching!,
gibss
 

Last edited:

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#5
If u r doing landscapes most of the time with the wide lens, then the f2.8 doesn't matter cause u be using a smaller aperture for more dof mostly.
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#6
I use the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-f/5.6.
 

NovJoe

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2009
5,650
0
0
~Sunny Little Island~
#7
I recommend the tokina 11-16/2.8 as it is useful during low light conditions. Moreover, it is pretty sharp throughout the frame.
 

VainKid

New Member
Aug 1, 2009
432
0
0
Bedok
#8
Just wonder if uwa are better and price diff?
 

fergo

New Member
Mar 19, 2007
185
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#9
i have decided to get the Tokina. mainly because of its wide aperture as compared to the Sigma. i do see myself taking some shots at functions and event. so prob a f2.8 will come in handy. used to use the 18-200mm VR often at such times. but felt that it isnt wide enough for certain group shots especially in confined areas.

looking at 17-55mm f2.8 as well. :)

hole in the pocket getting bigger!:bsmilie:
 

Snoweagle

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2005
14,002
0
0
Pasir Ris, Singapore
#11
im looking for WA lenses too. been researching and asking around.
just to share with you,

many recommend Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 and Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6. havent gotten much review on Nikon's 10-24mm.

i find it hard to choose which to get. each have their pros and cons.

Tokina - its a f2.8! but limited range.
Sigma - f4. slow lens. but many say you're not gonna use as an action lens etc. price is good.
Nikon - expensive but has a wide zoom range.

conclusion for me, i prob go for Tokina or Sigma. budget problem. :bsmilie:
on top of that, im thinking of getting a standard zoom to go along with it. either Sigma's 17-70mm f2.8 or Tokina's 16-50mm f2.8.

Gurus out there.. pls advice. thank you!
How fast u want to be? I've used f/4 lenses in the past and honestly they're not at all slow even in dim lighting.
 

fergo

New Member
Mar 19, 2007
185
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#13
How fast u want to be? I've used f/4 lenses in the past and honestly they're not at all slow even in dim lighting.
hahha... dun get me wrong. im not saying f4 is a slow lens. wat i meant was in comparison with a f2.8 lens.

i have seen how a Sigma 10-20 perform in a club. (of course with an ext flash)
the results are amazing!! nice and sharp. colours are great.

pardon me.. but i think im just one of those a**hole that yearns a f2.8 lens. :bsmilie:
 

yun10

New Member
Nov 18, 2008
402
0
0
#14
I'm using tokina 11-16mm... but didnt really using f2.8 much.. its pretty useful in some situation.. but most of the time, I using smaller aperture.
 

Jul 22, 2008
231
0
0
#15
Am also looking for a WA lens and done some read up. Verdict leans me to Tokina 11-16 due to the 2.8. Maybe will not be using 2.8 much of the time, but I prefer to have it when i need it rather than dont have it when i need it. sure there will be a diff between 2.8 & 4 in low light condition.
 

Snoweagle

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2005
14,002
0
0
Pasir Ris, Singapore
#16
hahha... dun get me wrong. im not saying f4 is a slow lens. wat i meant was in comparison with a f2.8 lens.

i have seen how a Sigma 10-20 perform in a club. (of course with an ext flash)
the results are amazing!! nice and sharp. colours are great.

pardon me.. but i think im just one of those a**hole that yearns a f2.8 lens. :bsmilie:
Between f/4 and f/2.8 even though only 1 stop away from each other, the f/2.8 is no where much faster too.
 

VainKid

New Member
Aug 1, 2009
432
0
0
Bedok
#17
dun quite understand your question bro..

better in wat sense? price wise varies with brands,quality etc
What I mean the diff in iq and picture wise between uwa and wa and price gap?
 

fergo

New Member
Mar 19, 2007
185
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#18
What I mean the diff in iq and picture wise between uwa and wa and price gap?
i aint no pro here... but wat i gathered from the net is that uwa usually have the problem of barrel distortion and pincushion. ('convex' 'concave' effect).
and some also mention of the softness of the picture at certain ends. (this i not very sure) :bsmilie:

for picture wise, i guess its self explanatory. the wider u go, the more field of view u get. which some photographers use it for some visual effects like 'depth'. also note the view changes when using it on a DX and FX camera.

read more from here. pretty good. cheers! :)

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm
 

etegration

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2003
2,364
3
38
http://360.itcow.com
360.itcow.com
#19
Well, there's the path not often travelled.

Zenitar 16mm f2.8
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=zenitar+16mm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/zenit/zenitar-16mm.htm
Don't worry about those QC issues, I got mine a month ago, and it is able to reach infinity focus.
It's soft at f2.8, but really sharp once you hit f4 onwards.
Costs $300 flat, got it over eBay.

Just to give you an idea of how wide 16mm is on a cropped sensor.

| Changi Beach, f22, 1/60, ISO400 |

There's the Peleng 8mm too, but be wary of the image quality.

Happy Researching!,
gibss
The Pelang 8mm is roughly the same, when you step all the way to F8 and onwards, it's relatively sharper. Some sellers of the Zenitar 16mm now offers the canon AF electronic too. It's a good buy at around the same price ~$300 SGD.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom