Wide Angle lens help

mrfizzed · May 9, 2013

Can someone point me in the right direction? I am looking for a wide angle option. I currently shoot DX but think I may end up with full frame bodies eventually.

I currently use a 18-200mm on my dx for my wide angle shots. I also have a 24-70 whicih on a fx body will be ok but not great. My 18-200mm isnt wide enough on my dx body all the time and will not work at all on a fx body if and when I get it. So I am looking at the
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which seems pretty nice, but it wont work on a fx body if I get one. Is there a lens that will not break the bank that will work on both a dx body and a fx body and still be pretty wide? Thanks in advance!

Matthew Saville · May 9, 2013

Hi Mr Fizzed!

My best recommendation would be to get a crop-sensor lens that will hold it's resale value. Unless full-frame is in your future less than 6-12 months from now, you've got plenty of shooting to do in the meantime and you should have the right lenses!

A few lenses that I know of which will hold their resale value quite well are:

Nikon 12-24 f4 DX (Nikon has a 10-24 as well, but it is more of a kit-quality lens and the Nikon 12-24 has a very good buy-and-sell market...)
Canon 10-22 EF-S (But I suspect you're shooting Nikon, even though you didn't actually say...)
Sigma 10-20 DC (They make an older, variable aperture version and a newer, f/3.5 constant version. The older version is sharper, but the newer version, well, is f/3.5 constant.)
Tokina 11-16 2.8 DX (Honestly, this is my recommendation!)

Why do I recommend the Tokina? Bang for the buck, PLUS, it can indeed be used at 16mm on full-frame without any vignetting, and the corners look great by f/11 or f/16! Check out my official test here: http://www.slrlounge.com/how-to-use-a-crop-sensor-lens-on-a-full-frame-dslr

...Especially if you eventually get a D800 with all that wonderful 36 megapixel cropping power; you can go as wide as 13mm if you crop to a 1:3 panoramic ratio!

If you already have a 24-70, then you may find that 24mm is wide enough 80% of the time and whenever you need to go wider, the 16mm will suffice from the Tokina 11-16.

Of course you're welcome to sell the Tokina when it comes time to upgrade to full-frame, and you could get the legendary Nikon 14-24 for about $2K, or the Tokina 16-28 full-frame for a lot less, or maybe the Nikon 16-35 f/4, etc. etc.

The bottom line, however, is that ironically if you want to get to 16mm and f/2.8 on Nikon full-frame, and still be able to use front filters for whatever reason, ...the Tokina 11-16 is your only option! Ironic but true, that the only way to achieve something this specific on Nikon full-frame is to use a crop sensor lens.

Like I said though, regardless of whether or not you eventually decide you need a true full-frame ultra-wide, The Tokina 11-16 is your best bet in the meantime. It will hold it's resale value well, in fact if you find a good used bargain today and take good care of it, you might be able to sell it again in a year or two for exactly the same price!

=Matt=

ziggy53 · May 9, 2013

The widest FF zoom that you can purchase, as far as I know, is the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM. It's pretty wide when it's used on a DX/crop 1.5x/1.6x body, and the only true "ultra-wide" zoom when it's used on a FX/FF body, with an AOV of 122 degrees.

Quality tends to vary so be sure to purchase from someone who allows returns. Image quality on a FF body is almost always soft in the corners and a bit weak in the edges.

Otherwise, since you shoot Nikon, there is the slightly less wide Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED. Yes, it's terribly expensive and no, it's not as wide as many true DX wide-angle zoom lens, but the image quality on either DX or FX bodies is just incredible, and better than many prime lenses.

If the subject matter is a still-life landscape, you might also consider using a very high-quality prime, like a true macro lens (just because they usually have very little optical distortion, which allows easier stitching and higher levels of detail as a result). Add a tripod with a panoramic head and shoot multiple, overlapping images. Then stitch the images together in post-production to produce images with staggering levels of detail; much more detail than any single image alone.

Mitchell · May 9, 2013

Can you tell us how wide you need to go?

MomaZunk · May 9, 2013

I second the Tokina 11-16mm. I purchased it for my D7000, and I use it now on my D600. I love it. If I need to go even wider on my D600, I just crop to a 4x5 ratio...

bfluegie · May 9, 2013

I was looking at the Tokina 11-16 for my D90 last fall. At the time the D600 was strongly rumored but it hadn't yet been announced. Still, I was thinking I didn't want to invest in a DX lens. Looking at the FX lenses available also had me unhappy because the ones I could afford weren't wide enough for my current DX camera, they are heavier, and the widest don't work with filters. I was reconsidering the Tokina 11-16 but I ended up spending $200 less on the Toking 12-24 f/4. I have been very happy with this lens. Focus and zoom are smooth and the lens has a solid feel. Image quality is limited by my skill, not the lens.

It will work on FX down to about 16mm, or so I am told. I haven't tried it myself. There are probably better lenses, but you might want to consider this option. I bought used from KEH and you can still get one for about $310. I don't see much discussion about this lens since it is typically overshadowed by the faster 11-16. If you don't need to go to 2.8 it might be a good choice.

Matthew Saville · May 10, 2013

bfluegie wrote: »

I was looking at the Tokina 11-16 for my D90 last fall. At the time the D600 was strongly rumored but it hadn't yet been announced. Still, I was thinking I didn't want to invest in a DX lens. Looking at the FX lenses available also had me unhappy because the ones I could afford weren't wide enough for my current DX camera, they are heavier, and the widest don't work with filters. I was reconsidering the Tokina 11-16 but I ended up spending $200 less on the Toking 12-24 f/4. I have been very happy with this lens. Focus and zoom are smooth and the lens has a solid feel. Image quality is limited by my skill, not the lens.

It will work on FX down to about 16mm, or so I am told. I haven't tried it myself. There are probably better lenses, but you might want to consider this option. I bought used from KEH and you can still get one for about $310. I don't see much discussion about this lens since it is typically overshadowed by the faster 11-16. If you don't need to go to 2.8 it might be a good choice.

Yep, the Tokina 12-24 is another alternative, and 24mm is a lot more useful than 16mm if you're comparing the long end of those two lenses.

So what it comes down to is, other than budget, ...which would you prefer, a more versatile zoom range for DX crop but forfeit 1mm on the wide end, (no biggie right?) and a stop of aperture, ...or be able to achieve 16mm f/2.8 on both full-frame and crop-sensor bodies, for under $500 used?

Personally I'd be happy with either, but my tendency to night time star trails and stuff would push me in the direction of the 11-16.

BTW, regarding lenses like the Sigma 12-24 and Nikon 14-24: In my opinion, neither is practical for someone who is on a budget and currently in between a crop sensor and full-frame situation. Both lenses are obscenely large, don't accept filters, and have limited zoom ranges. For as much money as each lens costs, I'd rather just save a bundle and get a "near-prime" lens that offers true ultra-wide capabilities on both crop sensors and full-frame sensors, in a smaller package that accepts 77mm filters...

=Matt=

moose135 · May 11, 2013

I shoot Canon, but let me add my love for the Tokina 11-16mm. Picked it up a few months ago, and am very pleased with the results.

Wide Angle lens help

Comments