DSLRUsers.com

Any opinions on these lenses from those that have used them?

I have been using my old 28mm f3.5 MF on the D200 using hyperfocal settings and it gives very good results. But its angle of view is only a 42mm equivalent.

I figure that with a 20mm lens I get to 30mm on the D200 - at 24mm it's the equivalent of the classic 35mm.

I don't mind the Manual focus when this wide, for the usual reasons.

Any thoughts or other ideas on how to get fast and wide with the D200 would be appreciated.

I am a bit leery of going to the DX lenses just yet because the only reasonably fast one is the expensive f2.8 zoom (am I right there?). And I would not be surprised if Nikon brought out a full frame digital body eventually.

I don't mind being told I am on the wrong track altogether I am simply curious.

Dan

I have the AF D f/2.8 version which is permantly attached to my F80, it gives a great wide angle view on the 35mm plus it has CRC.
I've never used the MF lens you have, but from my experience with the AF version I know I'll never be selling it.

ps I would love a 20mm prime!

Dan, I have a Nikkor 28mm MF, a Nikkor 20mm AFD and a Sigma 12-24. The 20mm is a nice lens, but it lost a lot of that wide angle impact when put on the Digital body. I like it, but your kit lens probably already does that and wides don't need to be that fast. I would consider the Tokina 12-24 ($650) or Sigma 12 -24 ($900) and simply sell them when a ff came up or the Sigma is ff but bigger and heavier to go with it. On a $650 lens the loss wont be that much, I would not be making the same decision for a $2k lens, I would just buy ff.

Hi Dan,

I was rather lucky to find a 24mm f2 Nikkor in my favourite shop in Chch, NZ http://www.photo.co.nz when I was visiting in January and was able to test it on the D200 I was also testing at the time. I paid about $360 for the lens and it has since become my favourite lens for candid and street photogaphy. It is small and unintimidating, more so than simialr fast lenses like the Nikon 28mm f1.4 or the Sigma f1.8 WA lenses. Focusing can be a trick on low light however if you keep your eye on the focus indicator dot in the bottom left of the frame you can usually get it right. I also have the Tokina 12-24 and a Nikon 20-35mm however the 24mm f2 is my preference now for working in low light. I happily use it in conditions as low as a 15th of a second at f2 at 1600 ISO. On the whole the lens is sharp but given you are not really using the full frame of the lens' potential it is easy to understand why.

If you get the chance to buy this lens at a reasonable price I would probably grab it. Hope this is a help!

Ants

Dan, should also point out the ultra wides zoom are usually not the image quality of a wide prime.

Glen wrote:Dan, I have a Nikkor 28mm MF, a Nikkor 20mm AFD and a Sigma 12-24. The 20mm is a nice lens, but it lost a lot of that wide angle impact when put on the Digital body. I like it, but your kit lens probably already does that and wides don't need to be that fast. I would consider the Tokina 12-24 ($650) or Sigma 12 -24 ($900) and simply sell them when a ff came up or the Sigma is ff but bigger and heavier to go with it. On a $650 lens the loss wont be that much, I would not be making the same decision for a $2k lens, I would just buy ff.

This is very good advice.

If you have the bucks and dont mind the weight. A 17 -35 2.8ED-IF AFS will also serve the purpose. It has manual overide.

I think you need to decide Dan what you are really wanting to use the lens for. If you are into working in low light conditions then you should get yourself a fast prime lens like the Nikkor 24mm f2. It is both affordable and reliable. If you are looking for a wide-angle for general purpose photography then get the Tokina 12-24mm, its a great lens however it will slow you down two stops in low light.

What do you like making pictures of?

Sorry but I can offer no opinion on the two lenses you ask about.

However, I bought the Nikon 12-24 for my wife and her D70 so we share it, and I gotta say I love the way it makes my D200 sing. Around $1350 from Hong Kong Supplies.

I have sampled a Tokina lens from a shop. At its widest, I am particularly disappointed with the way the extremeties of the image are distorted. A sample of what I mean can be viewed here.

The Nikon glass is fantastic. I know it's quite an outlay, but it is something that will serve you long and well. And the benefit of mixed focal lengths as opposed to being stuck on prime.

I know it's f4 which won't help if you're looking for narrow DOF, but DOF is less noticeable in wide angle lenses anyway, and if speed is the issue, well I love my new tripod and most of my images are with that now. And there's also ISO adjust (couldn't do THAT with film!!)

Just my thoughts.

HKSupplies do not have the best price on the Nikon 12-24mm.

You can get it out of Adelaide for $1,218.00 or $1,199.00 out of HK from KeaPhoto.

I would go Adelaide

sirhc55 wrote:You can get it out of Adelaide for $1,218.00 or $1,199.00 out of HK from KeaPhoto

Cool! A great price for a lens that they try to charge $2059 for in a local shop.
Regardless, I am happy at only paying $1350. A great lens.

Who in Adelaide? I must check them out for future purchases...

http://search.ebay.com.au/_W0QQsassZcamcamfeverQQhtZ-1

They are grey imports the same as d-d-digital in Sydney.

I have a Tokina 12-24 as well as a Nikon 24mm f2 MF.
Two different lenses that both serve a different purpose.
I enjoy both but must say that the 24mm f2 Nikon is one very sharp lens and I have had mine for about 18 years and is like new. Also MF on a wide lens for distant shots is not a major hassle.
These lenses were very expensive in their day and I have seen them for sale for up to $600 plus. European Cameras in Sydney had one a while ago for $450 odd if my memory serves me right. Also not a big lens.

Cheers
Albert

kalkadan wrote:I have been using my old 28mm f3.5 MF on the D200 using hyperfocal settings and it gives very good results. But its angle of view is only a 42mm equivalent.

I figure that with a 20mm lens I get to 30mm on the D200 - at 24mm it's the equivalent of the classic 35mm.

If your 28/f3.5 is the Ai(S) version you will find that it beats both the 24/f2 and the 20/f2.8 in corner-to-corner sharpness and overall contrast, plus it has good flare-resistance. Don't dump it too qickly. I reckon it is every bit as good as the venerable 28/f2.8 AiS.

That said, I understand that you're after more extension at the wide end - like any Nikon user who has converted to digital...

Cheers
Steffen.

I really appreciate the advice everyone has given.

I have been looking at the Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG Aspherical HSM.

It covers 18 - 36 for the D200. And, as Glen says, if Nikon go full frame then it can work with that.

DP in Sydney have it priced at $A995 + $A18 for a courier to Brisbane.

From B&H in the States it works out to $A973 incl. postage.

I have sent emails to DP and HK Supplies to check availability (and in the case of HK, the price).

I don't want to go 'wonky' wide - you know, all funny angles and distortion - but I would like to get well under an effective 35mm in full frame format. Some have asked what I want it for: the answer is landscapes, interiors, occasional portraits of subjects in their work/play settings.

I know it's slow. But what experience have you guys had cranking up the ISO on the D200 to 800 or 1600?

Any comments?

many thanks

Dan

Slow? At its 12mm@f/5.6 you can definately hand hold at very slow shutters (1/25 - 1/10 or maybe slower)

And I dont see a point of shooting wide angle wide open. You always want to get as much as possible in the scene with wide angles. And DOF rules applied to short focal length -- hyperfocal is just inches from your lens.

Dan,

I have the 12-24 Sigma and am happy with it. Great lens for interiors as the distortion is quite low, good for landscapes though does have a large aspherical front element which cannot fit a CPL, I don't view this as a portrait lens. It is physically larger than some DX others but is FF.

No wonky angles at all, really all this class of lens is quite amazing for the money, 7-8 years ago you would have probably paid $2.5k for a similar prime lens, though better quality. That said, these lenses wont be quite as sharp as the 24mm Ants suggested, but there is a big difference between an effective 18mm FOV and an effective 36mm FOV.

I would suggest HKSupplies or DD, why bother with the hassle from the states if DD has it at a close price?