Landscape lens.. Down to the final 2

Andysnap

Andysnap

Suspended / Banned
Messages
16,322
Name
Andy Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All,

I think I've narrowed it down to either the Tokina 11-16mm or 12-24mm lens for landscape shots.
Now, I'm stuck. Which one? the 11-16mm is more expensive but does it offer a sharper image for my money?.
Any help or ideas anyone, I really can't decide.:shrug:

Cheers

Andy
 
The 11-16 is on my list of wants (after the 70-200 F2.8 VR)
 
I'd rather go with the 12-24 as its a better range than the 11-16. What lens do you have next up from this (ie 18-70 24-70) ?
 
devitt said:
I'd rather go with the 12-24 as its a better range than the 11-16. What lens do you have next up from this (ie 18-70 24-70) ?
Click to expand...

I've got the 18-55mm kit lens which is why I looked at the 11-16mm as I've covered some of thae 12-24mm range already, but it is quite a bit more expensive.

Andy
 
have you considered the 10-20 sigma? cracking lens
 
Or a prime 24 on its own...not so dear and about the most common wide for landscape (full frame)
 
G-Kenny said:
have you considered the 10-20 sigma? cracking lens
Click to expand...


I have and I'm sure its a good lens but I've seen too many people complaining they've had a bad one and also reports its a bit soft at 10mm.

Andy
 
Lensflare said:
Or a prime 24 on its own...not so dear and about the most common wide for landscape (full frame)
Click to expand...

Mmm.. no I hadn't but I may have to now. :bang:

Andy
 
If you are on a cropping sensor, then the 18mm is 1.5x = 27mm or 1.6x = 29mm,

so you will need something in the range of 16mm to get the equivalent of 24mm. I think you will be in the zooms for this. If you use a full frame sensor, then the 24mm prime will blow your socks off - regardless of C or N.
 
I was looking at the Tokina 12-24, as that range would suit me perfectly.

This might seem a stupid suggestion, but think about the future, you buy this lens, but what about the next one? What if you then want a 24-70? That way the 12-24 would cover alot more then the 11-16. HOWEVER, there has to be a reason why the 11-16 is alot more expensive! Haha!

Mike
 
Andysnap said:
I've got the 18-55mm kit lens which is why I looked at the 11-16mm as I've covered some of thae 12-24mm range already, but it is quite a bit more expensive.

Andy
Click to expand...

In that case you may be better off going for the 11-16. As others had said thought the 24mm prime is a cracker of a lens and one I may get one day as its great when tight on space in the traveling bag.
 
Andysnap said:
I have and I'm sure its a good lens but I've seen too many people complaining they've had a bad one and also reports its a bit soft at 10mm.

Andy
Click to expand...

I've had a 10-20mm for about two years and it's been faultless. It's my favourite lens for nice landscaping :thumbs:
 
Andy
I should imagine you will find 24mm (36mm) useless on a crop sensor.

Going back to your Sigma 12-24, although not impossible it will be very difficult to use screw filters and impossible to use cokin filter grads which will be needed for what your doing. If you require a wide angle starting around 10/12mm and not around 17mm take the advice of others on here and buy the Sigma 10-20. Any shop will allow you to test the lens outside and put the lens to one side, take the file home and view/print.

A Sigma 10-20 has the image quality of a Canon 17-40L

Dave
 
Oh Bu**er, I'm back to square one again. I didn't realise that there was a filter issue with the Tokina. OK sigma back in the running again.

Andy
 
dcash29 said:
Andy
I should imagine you will find 24mm (36mm) useless on a crop sensor.

Going back to your Sigma 12-24, although not impossible it will be very difficult to use screw filters and impossible to use cokin filter grads which will be needed for what your doing. If you require a wide angle starting around 10/12mm and not around 17mm take the advice of others on here and buy the Sigma 10-20. Any shop will allow you to test the lens outside and put the lens to one side, take the file home and view/print.

A Sigma 10-20 has the image quality of a Canon 17-40L

Dave
Click to expand...

In terms of filters I had to buy a wide angle adapter for my Lee kit in order to use my ND Grad on the 10-20. I bought an adapter ring for my Cokin P kit and at 10mm you get really bad vignetting as you can see the filter adapter at such a wide angle.

With the wide angle adapter ring the Lee works a treat a 10mm :thumbs:
 
The 11-16 is a must have, its awesome! I've not tried the 12-24 but from all the reviews i've seen its a tossup between better IQ (11-16) and more flexibility (12-24).

Personally I haven't used the 11-16 past 14 yet, wide is the way to go :D
 
Sigma 10-20 is a cracking lens. I had to sell mine to fund another more needed lens, but will be getting another as soon as funds allow.
Have a look at this thread from Nikon Cafe. If this doesnt get you drooling for a 10-20, nothing will......
http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=139327

Allan
 
IMHO actually for landscape a wide angle can diminish scenes not add to them. Nothing worse than the Grand Canyon with an ultra wide angle - too much sky, and not enough detail, is the Wide Angle 101 error folks make.

I don't think a REALLY wide lens is actually that useful in the grand scheme of things,and they need to be used with care (have a good solid near / middle / far composition to use a wide angle)

You'll tend to be at the longer end (18 to 24mm) much more than 10mm.

Don't feel you HAVE to fit lots in, often zooming in on an interesting landscape feature is more interesting that w-i-d-e for the sake of it.

Use with care.

Nothing here in this recent thread was shot with a wide angle, I think 17mm was the widest I went:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=87621
 
I've got the Tokina 12-24 and have to say it is one of my favourites lens and for the price you wouldn't be disappointed I'm sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top