Ultra-Wide Angle Dilemma? DX & FX

[DraganDL]

If you're on a budget, I suggest a prime, like Samyang 14mm f/2.8. It is a manual focus-only, but very sharp and with the help of a "focus confirmation dot" you cannot miss it. Covers FX, too... My experience is that zooms are more needed (composition-wise) in telephoto range, and when it comes to extremely wide angles, any length between, say, 10mm and 15mm will do.

 

[PaulWog]

Well, I just have to click "submit payment" between one of the two: Nikkor 10-24mm, and Tokina 11-16mm. I've decided I'm purchasing one of the two. The Sigma 10-20mm f4-f5.6 was a runner-up in my decision making.

I would really like to be decisive on the matter. I have two options as I see it:

Option #1: Get the nikkor 10-24mm. It is 1mm wider (on DX that's 1.5mm FoV wider, which is ~10% wider). It also is 8mm longer, for whatever that's worth. Stick with DX, get a lens that is fast and handles 30-35mm later this year. I'll have to worry about (and possibly do a few exchanges) due to focus accuracy & no focus adjustment on my D5200.

New Option #2: Same as above, but the Sigma 10-20mm f4-f5.6.

Option #2 (edit - not getting this lens anymore): Get the Tokina 11-16mm. It is $200 cheaper, and functions better on full frame. Instead of sticking with DX, I could switch to full frame instead of getting a 30-35mm lens sometime in the future and continue to use the Tokina 11-16mm. I'll have to worry about focus accuracy right away, but it won't be the biggest deal in the world on a wide angle.

edit: After posting this, I've read so many issues about the Tokina 11-16mm product variation. This thread that I googled up makes me think I shouldn't get it: http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3807

 

[Rick M]

Just curious, but why do you think the Tokina is going to function better on Fx than the Nikon? They will both suffer the same issue and they will both work if you buy an Fx with the Dx crop mode.

 

[PaulWog]

Just curious, but why do you think the Tokina is going to function better on Fx than the Nikon? They will both suffer the same issue and they will both work if you buy an Fx with the Dx crop mode.

The Tokina 11-16mm in FX mode functions at 15mm and 16mm quite well according to many reviews. The image circle supports these focal lengths without issues (larger image circle than most DX lenses, similar to the case with the 35mm 1.8G DX lens). With that said, I've read about some major QC issues with the 11-16mm. I'm actually going to take a look at the 10-20mm Sigma lens tomorrow (f4-f5.6) if it's in stock at a local camera shop.

I think I may have narrowed my choices down between the Sigma 10-20mm f4-f5.6, and the Nikon 10-24mm. I will buy locally, so the prices are $500 + tax vs. $770 + tax.

 

[PaulWog]

So here's what I'm planning on doing (tomorrow), after I give it a night to sleep on the idea:

I will buy the 10-20mm Sigma lens once I find a good copy. I will buy the 35mm 1.8G DX lens as well once I find a good copy (I had one before that needed a considerable amount of focus tuning, sold it // I hate the bokeh on the lens in forested areas, so I'll just compensate with my 50mm). I will stick with a DX setup. Once a full-frame comes out that I want, I will keep the D5200 as my backup camera (since it's relatively small and with a lens attached fits well in a bag), and start shooting with two cameras (granted DX-mode might be superior on a camera 2 years in the future than a D5200 natively in DX, but I plan to travel to Europe so having a beater camera might be good - I'd rather not fly with ultra expensive gear).