Nikon or Sigma 12-24mm lens?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Chris Pisarra, Mar 24, 2006.

  1. Needing a new toy, this week's obsession is a 12-24mm lens for my Nikon

    The Tokina is fixed at f4, so I'm not interested.

    The Sigma and the Nikon **seem** to be pretty similar, except for the
    $3-400 price difference. (shopping on eBay)

    Is the Nikon lens really worth that much more, or would I just be
    paying for the name?

    Any advice is appreciated.



    I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn't it.
    --Groucho Marx
    Chris Pisarra, Mar 24, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Chris Pisarra

    Paul Furman Guest

    No that's good, it's better than the Sigma 4.5-5.6
    I've got the Sigma & it's OK but the reason for the price is also that
    it's the only one that's full frame. I was just shown this review and
    found it helpful:

    But they seem to land on the Tamron 11-18/3.5-5.6 (second cheapest) and
    they don't talk much about sharpness. The Sigma is 'OK' with sharpness &
    excellent for rectilinear work, well build, big & has a problem with
    flare which reduces contrast.

    So I say go for the Nikon or research the Tamron & Tokina's sharpness,
    flare & contrast.
    Paul Furman, Mar 24, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Thanks

    Chris Pisarra, Mar 24, 2006
  4. Chris,

    This month's issue of Popular Photography magazine (April 2006) has a review
    seven ultra-wide lenses including the Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, Nikon, as well
    as the Pentax, Canon, and Konica Minolta. All lenses are in the 10-22 mm

    The Tokina had the sharpest image in the lower cost lenses. The Nikon, at
    $920, was the most expensive received only average reviews for performance.

    I bought the Sigma 10-20 mm. It's OK, but the barrel distortion is high at
    1.26%, the Nikon was 1.31%, the Canon had 1.40%, the Tokina had 1.22%, and
    the Tamron was best with 1.01%.

    Good luck,

    - Russ
    Russell Lombardo, Mar 24, 2006
  5. Chris Pisarra

    Chimper Guest

    It seems like Tokina is making some great lenses, ever time you see one
    of the reviews with a few lenses when its cost and sharpness they come
    out on top!
    Chimper, Mar 25, 2006
  6. Chris Pisarra

    JimmyG Guest

    Ditto. The constant aperture is by FAR more preferable.

    I have the Tokina, and use it on my D70 and D200. It is a fabulous lens.
    JimmyG, Mar 26, 2006
  7. I would advise you to stay away from the DX lenses (the ones made
    "specially" for the digital cameras).

    Do stay with Nikon lenses -- just go get the 14mm f/2.8 ED, or, if
    that one exceeds the budget, then get the 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 ED for
    below half the cost of the other one.

    The 12-24mm is really an 18-36mm, only that you can not use it on
    a Nikon film camera (and will not be able to use it on whatever
    cameras Nikon may release in the future with full-size sensors,
    which I believe may become an inevitability for them in the near
    future). So, the 14mm lens will give you a wider view, and the
    18-35 zoom will give you exactly the same. Why go for the model
    that does a fraction of what the other does?

    Carlos Moreno, Mar 26, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.