Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 13, 2007, 7:48 PM   #1
v12
Member
 
v12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 90
Default

I am slowly starting to build my arsenal of lenses thanks to many of you who have helped me decide and inform me of the differences

I now own a 105mm 2.8 vr and am looking to add a wide angle next and need some suggestions.

Budget is flexible as long as the lens produces quality shots. I find myself with the 50mm 1.4 on for walk n shoot situations but I find it not wide enough for many shots so I am going to buy a wide angle. I foresee using this lens for wide angle group shots, general walk around and landscape shots as I have found a nice spot to shoot the sunset in my area that id like to practice at

So far I have been suggested the Nilon 17-55mm 2.8 that retails around $1250. I am open for other suggestions though. I dont mind spending the cash but would like to hear other alternatives.

The Tamron SP AF 17-35mm is one I have found on ebay but I dont know enough about lenses to make a good judgement

any thoughts and suggestions?
v12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 13, 2007, 10:15 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

I had both the Tamron 17-35 and 28-75 (made for Minolta) and have the 28-75 Tamron for my D200. I liked both lenses, and never regretted not having the 17-55. The inexpensive 28-105D 3.5-4.5 macro is a nice lens, and has decent macro, but it may not be wide enough for you.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 14, 2007, 2:58 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

If you really want to go wide angle, and not just the eqivalent of the kit 18/70 lens, look no further than the Tokina 12/24 lens. Not as well built as the Nikon equivalent, but a very fine lens at a modest price.
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2007, 7:34 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

cameranserai wrote:
Quote:
If you really want to go wide angle, and not just the eqivalent of the kit 18/70 lens, look no further than the Tokina 12/24 lens. Not as well built as the Nikon equivalent, but a very fine lens at a modest price.
I have heard high prasie for this lens.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 19, 2007, 5:17 PM   #5
v12
Member
 
v12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 90
Default

is the f4 rating sufficient for shooting? I would assume in my newbiness that a 2.8 would have more advantages?

I also have seen this lens for s decent price but dont know anything about its performance?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...:B:WNARL:US:12
v12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2007, 1:54 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

F4 is suitable for most situations but shooting indoors without additional lighting/flash would be a problem. You can up the ISO level to copmpensate at the risk of noise or grain as I still prefer to call it. The Nikon 12/24 is also F4 anyway.

Personally, after 25 years of watching the hype over lenses grow, I am amazed at how people get sucked in to the statistics and think that a better lens means automatically a better photograph. Not so, since the composition is in the eye of the photographer. F2.8 is OK but for landscape about as much use as a chocolate saucepan since it is depth of field you need, not shallowness. What point having the tree or building nearby in focus and the rest blurred? Lousy composition or technique= lousy photo.

The uses to which you propose to put the lens require wide angle (group shots and landscape) so you need wide angle but not necessarily a shallow depth of field and I reckon most of your shots will be between f8 and f16 anyway.. I have both lenses you mentionand the 17/55 now sits on the shelf a lot since either I carry the 12/24 or the 18/200. If I want portrait quality with creamy bokehthen the 17/55 is useful but at the same time I can cover it with the 70/200 f2.8 if I stand back anyway. People rave about the 85mm or 105mm f1.4 but the depth of field is so thin that the tip of the nose can be in focus and the rest of the face out of focus so it is a highly specialised lens, just like the DC lenses.

To sum up, don't frankly get carried away too much. The Tokina 12/24 is a superb lens at the price and do remember that in old terms it is 18/36 field of view anyway so not that wide an angle lens. I think it would be perfect for the usage indicated, far cheaper than the 17/55 and actually much better suited. The bonus is you get to keep a lot of your money in your pocket at the same time.
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2007, 3:21 PM   #7
v12
Member
 
v12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 90
Default

ally appreciate your comments, I am learning more and more as I post and read

I will be sure NOT to purchase the 2.8. The depth of field methodolgy is something Iam not to familiar with obviously so it helps when things are explained to me

I looked at the Tokina and also found a Tamron that can be seen here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...:B:WNARL:US:12

any thoughts on the Tamron?
v12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2007, 3:47 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

I know the Tamron exists but frankly the Tokina gets high praise in every review. Since the lenses are of a similar price there seems to me to be no reason to risk it. The Tokina is the one to go for in this range. You really have to work out just how wide you need the lens to be since the "kit" lens, the 18/70, which I still have is a damned good lens at the price and you can take a full face shot of someone from about a foot range. If that is wide enough for you then that would be my choice because at times a longer zoom is extremely useful. If not then the Tokina would be my choice above all others at the price. The Nikon 12/24 is obviously better quality but at a considerable difference in price.
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2007, 8:58 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
PHOTO-PRO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 268
Default

You should look into the Sigma 10-20mm, 12-24mm, 0r the 15-30mm, these are excellent lenses I own the Sigma 15-30mm, and my brother owns the Sigma 10-20mm, both very excellent lens you would be very happy with the results.
Good Luck, Kevin
PHOTO-PRO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2007, 4:12 AM   #10
v12
Member
 
v12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 90
Default

its settled! I recived my Tokina 12-24mm lens in the mail today!! I am very excited and cant wait to practice with it!

I appreciate the advice and info you all have provided me! Now its on to a zoom lens!

regards
v12 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:46 AM.