Looking for a Wide Angle Lens

Jimbob 2705

Senior Member
Hi All,

I'm looking at adding a Wide Angle Lens to my collection, to be used currently with a D7100, although it would be a bonus if it would work with FX camera if I upgrade at a later date.

I'd prefer if it had a built in autofocus, just so it could be used on a D5100 as well, but that's not a deal breaker.

Ideally I'm looking for something which goes as wide as 10-12mm.

Budget is around £400, but if say I can get a lot better lens at £500 I could stretch to that.

I don't mind third party companies, as long as their reputable.

So come on guys, hit me with some suggestions :)

Many Thanks

James


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
I could be wrong, but I don't know if you will find much, if anything, for FX in the 10-12mm range. Usually 14mm is where wide angle lenses start for FX. Sorry I don't have any suggestions in your price range though. :(
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
No such beast, my friend. A 16-35mm will be "wide" for you, but not "ultra-wide" like it is on an FX. Consider that the kit 18-55mm is an effective 27-80mm, even the hallowed 14-24mm will only give you 21mm on the short end.

So, if you're going to invest in a DX ultrawide, go with something WIDE. I've got a Sigma 8-16mm that I love. It's not as versatile as the 10-20mm because it does not take front loaded filter, but that extra 2mm giving you a 12mm effective focal length is something you can't get for cheap on a FX camera. So, I get to go both longer and shorted with my D7100.
 

J-see

Senior Member
I have the Nikon 10-24mm on my DX and I love that lens. I didn't test it yet to see what it does on the FX.

It's a bit more expensive than 400 I fear.
 

moony16

Senior Member
Perhaps a used Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6. I forgot about this lens.
Yes, this has been for a long time & still is, the widest rectilinear lens available for Fx. I owned and shot it on Dx and Fx. On Dx, after 12mm it is amazingly free of distortions. The lens has excellent contrast, but demands stopping down to get even performance. For the money, if you must have UWA) it can't be beat IMO. Is the 14-24 better, Da, of course it is. But is it better when you consider price? --only if the living you are making demands the 14-24 results to keep payroll afloat. Good Luck jt
 

J-see

Senior Member
I tested my DX 10-24mm on the FX to see if it was worth using on that. I tried 1.5x DX mode, 1.2x crop and FX mode and manually adjusted the distortion and vignetting as good as possible. At 10mm there's always a degree of distortion even on the DX but I lose most of the image. On FX there's most distortion and almost beyond fixing. The middle ground however is reasonable.

DX:
029.jpg

1.2x:
033.jpg

FX:
035-2.jpg

More fixing should be possible in PS.
 

J-see

Senior Member
And this is the FX version manually adjusted in PS.

035-2-Edit-2.jpg

And with some work it shows we're able to use a 10mm DX on the FX. For landscapes it should even be easier.
 

D12345678

Senior Member
Another BIG vote for the Tokina 116. Honestly I wouldn't even consider anything else and yes. Fantastic on the D7100, works perfectly well on FX at 16mm (sharp center with soft corners, but still good) and can be picked up second hand at a reasonable price. Very well built, sharp, overall a great lens!
This was taken on a D610 @ 16mm
DSC_1252.JPG

And this on the D7100
DSC_3517.JPG
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
Back in my DX days, i used a Nikon 10-24mm and i liked the results i got from it, a mint second hand example easily fits into the price range of the OP
 
Top