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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 9, 2010, 4:24 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

looking to pull the plug on this for christmas
any new inputs?

Dave
T&T
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2010, 6:07 PM   #12
csd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 169
Default

I've got the Nikon 10-24 mm DX lens (had it for over a year) and love it. I use it primarily for Landscape and leave a Polarizer on it all the time.
I looked at Sigma and Tokina lenses but have never been disappointed with Nikon so decided to stick with Nikon yet again. I don't think you can go wrong with any of the options you mention. If you like specifications and detailed test results with nifty interactive charts and haven't looked already you can check out the lenses here:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php
csd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2010, 7:22 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

took a chance and went with the sigma 8-16
liked the idea of 2.8
liked the idea of being a nikon
but decided i wanted a ultra wide zoom

FWIW both slr gear and photozone gave a very good review of this lens especially photone gave it a highly recommend thumbs up which is a rear thing photozone gives, but yet Ken Rockwell talks down this lens.

Dave
T&T

Last edited by dafiryde; Dec 9, 2010 at 11:45 PM.
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2010, 4:33 PM   #14
csd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 169
Default

> FWIW both slr gear and photozone gave a very good review of this lens especially photone gave it a highly recommend thumbs up which is a rear thing photozone gives, but yet Ken Rockwell talks down this lens.

Congrat's on your purchase - I'm sure you'll be happy! I'd believe slr gear and photozone before Rockwell any day! His site has its strengths but he is oftentimes contradictory (I remember reading something on filters on his site whereby he said to avoid Tiffen then recommended them later in the same article).
csd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2010, 9:23 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,327
Default

I own the 12-24 f/4; great pictures with a constant aperture. I use it for landscapes exclusively. You have to correct for a little bit of barrel distortion at 12mm. Otherwise, it is very sharp and very little CA.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2010, 5:13 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

Well i got my 8-16 a week ago and have been so busy, but today i finally spared a few moments to see what this lens has to offer
up close and personal this baby is sharp as a nail, but shooting distant objects , when zoomed in on the subject its soft, shot a test chart at all focal lengths and no signs of front or back focus. pics at 1 foot to 15 feet sharp as can be. but if i shoot at something 20 feet or more away soft looking.
is this normal?

Dave
T&T
dafiryde 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 9:47 PM.