tokina 11-16 or 12-28????

11-16 or 12-28

im in the market for one of these , i was pretty settled on getting the 11-16 but now considering the 12-28 just for the versatility

im shooting with a d7100 so the extra stop on the 11-16 considering the iso capabilities of todays cameras might be worth the trade off

With the modern D7100, you don't need a faster ultrawide than F4. The extra range of the 12-28 will come in handy a lot more often than the need for F2.8. If it was me, I'd definitely choose the Tokina 12-28/4.

Kind of depends on what you're going to do with it. I use mine for wide open landscape and shooting Milky Way wide open aperture wise and telephoto wise. For me, I really never move beyond 11-12mm. Heck, I'd be thrilled if the Tokina was a prime at 11mm like my Rokinon at 14mm.

If you can see yourself using the zoom then get the 12-28mm.

It's really hard to help because of us each having our own uses.

just had a thought , i was just thinking on normal shooting in daylight no problems with the f4 , but im pretty interested to be able to shoot the milky way and the 2.8 would be needed there to keep the exposure times under 30 seconds to limit star trails , think ill have to go the 11-16 , shame the 12-28 wasnt f2.8 but i guess then it would be 3oo bucks or more expensive

ahh just posted this while moab was posting so hadnt read his post lol

milky way photos definitely the 11-16

egosbar said:

just had a thought , i was just thinking on normal shooting in daylight no problems with the f4 , but im pretty interested to be able to shoot the milky way and the 2.8 would be needed there to keep the exposure times under 30 seconds to limit star trails , think ill have to go the 11-16 , shame the 12-28 wasnt f2.8 but i guess then it would be 3oo bucks or more expensive

Click to expand...

Well then, you answered your own question.

For what it's worth, I understand that an astro mount is a better investment than a new lens for star photography.

egosbar said:

just had a thought , i was just thinking on normal shooting in daylight no problems with the f4 , but im pretty interested to be able to shoot the milky way and the 2.8 would be needed there to keep the exposure times under 30 seconds to limit star trails , think ill have to go the 11-16 , shame the 12-28 wasnt f2.8 but i guess then it would be 3oo bucks or more expensive

Click to expand...

The Tokina 11-16mm, D7100, and post processing skills can give you some beautiful night images with practice.

yes lol , its early
dam why are lenses so expensive , theres two i think should complete what i need
nikon d7100 , ive got a 18-55 , 55-300 , 50mm 1.8 , add the 11-16 and nikon 105mm micro

really want but couldnt justify the 70-200 2.8 even though its supberb , my old man has one

thanks guys even though i answered my own question in the end haha

awesome moab , exactly what im looking to shoot when i go fishing , darling river , no lights , got the free program called stellarium its perfect for picking the day i need to be there , also what time the angle that i want of the milky way will be
just need clear skies

egosbar said:

awesome moab , exactly what im looking to shoot when i go fishing , darling river , no lights , got the free program called stellarium its perfect for picking the day i need to be there , also what time the angle that i want of the milky way will be
just need clear skies

Click to expand...

DaveW turned me on to Stellarium a long time ago and it's just as important as my camera IMO.

Just want to say I love my 12-24. I haven't done much night shooting as yet but it's just great for everything else