Image distortion when using a wide(r) angle lens

Hi,

I’m having a “tiny” problem, I don’t know what I now want to do next.
My shortest focal length, which I have now, is the 24 mm of my 24-120 F4 VR on a FX camera.
I am very satisfied with the performance of this lens, but sometimes the distortion at 24mm is a bit annoying.
In addition, I am also thinking to buy a more wide angle lens.
But I also want a more light sensitivity for my"walk-around" lens.
So a wide angle lens, light sensitivity "f 2.8" and with less distortion.
And a “walk-around” thing, also light sensitivity "f 2.8" and less distortion.
My candidates for the wide angle Tokina 16-28 F2.8, for my walk-around lens theTamron 24-70 F2.8 VC lens.
And Yes ...I know ... distortion is easy to correct in editing programs (automatically).
But if there is something "not or little", also "nothing or little" has to be corrected ...
Now you can read and study on various places on the Internet lens tests, where they also test data on distortion ...
However, I read all different results there...
For example:
At "Photozone.de" the two walk-around lenses have on 24 mm and the wideangle lens on 16 mm respectively Nikon: -3.55% barrel; Tamron: 3.8% barrel and Tokina: 2.44% barrel distortion.
But when I go to "DXO" to compare these lenses, taking a look in the tab "Measurements" and in "Distortion", I see for the Nikon and Tamron 0.9% distortion at 24 mm for the Tokina at 16 mm 0.8% distortion.
At "Digitalpicture" numbers are not displayed ...
At "SLRGear" they have at the FF test for the Nikon up to 1.25%, for the Tamron 1% distortion. The Tokina has not been tested.
All sites have different test data.
How should I now, as a simple civilian, make a good decision reading this different data?
Who knows who is right here?? Which data is the most correct?

Ad B

Correcting geometric distortion optically is an expensive exercise, hence highly corrected lenses tend to be priced stratospherically. Unless the geometric distortion is complex it is easily corrected, but there may be a slight loss in resolution.

So I would live with lens distortion unless the job demands it (as in lithography) and correct it in post.

Ad B said:

Hi,

I’m having a “tiny” problem, I don’t know what I now want to do next.
My shortest focal length, which I have now, is the 24 mm of my 24-120 F4 VR on a FX camera.
I am very satisfied with the performance of this lens, but sometimes the distortion at 24mm is a bit annoying.
In addition, I am also thinking to buy a more wide angle lens.
But I also want a more light sensitivity for my"walk-around" lens.
So a wide angle lens, light sensitivity "f 2.8" and with less distortion.
And a “walk-around” thing, also light sensitivity "f 2.8" and less distortion.
My candidates for the wide angle Tokina 16-28 F2.8, for my walk-around lens theTamron 24-70 F2.8 VC lens.
And Yes ...I know ... distortion is easy to correct in editing programs (automatically).
But if there is something "not or little", also "nothing or little" has to be corrected ...
Now you can read and study on various places on the Internet lens tests, where they also test data on distortion ...
However, I read all different results there...
For example:
At "Photozone.de" the two walk-around lenses have on 24 mm and the wideangle lens on 16 mm respectively Nikon: -3.55% barrel; Tamron: 3.8% barrel and Tokina: 2.44% barrel distortion.
But when I go to "DXO" to compare these lenses, taking a look in the tab "Measurements" and in "Distortion", I see for the Nikon and Tamron 0.9% distortion at 24 mm for the Tokina at 16 mm 0.8% distortion.
At "Digitalpicture" numbers are not displayed ...
At "SLRGear" they have at the FF test for the Nikon up to 1.25%, for the Tamron 1% distortion. The Tokina has not been tested.
All sites have different test data.
How should I now, as a simple civilian, make a good decision reading this different data?
Who knows who is right here?? Which data is the most correct?

Ad B

Click to expand...

I do interior photos of a very old factory and use my 14mm so I gets lots of distortion. I use a program callera DxO Viewpoint and it will correct it very fast and easy. I use it a lot anytime I get to close and fine lines not parallel and boxes not square.

The wider the lens the more it likes to be level.

You can run around like a chicken with its head cut off in an attempt to minimize this inevitable distortion or... You can accept the fact that distortion is going to happen at certain focal lengths, learn how to correct it in post and get on with life; I personally suggest the latter path but it's up to you. There's plenty of software that will apply a lens profile to make automatic corrections but learning how to correct common distortions manually is not difficult and probably a good "tool" to have in your "belt".

Hi,

Okay, I think I have to accept distortion and remove it with the software I have in my cam and/or my computer.
But the main issue here is, how can I make a good decision when test results differ that much between different testers.
Should I sell my Nikon 24-120 lens and buy the Tammy 24-70? Do I get less distortion, the same or more?? Is it worth the move??
That's why I read tests and test results, to make good decisions.
And asking questions...

Thanks so far.