Which lens?

[Glenda]

I currently have a D7000 and my husband is using my D3100, (at last a hobby we can share). I want to purchase a wide angle lens before our next trip and am currently tossing up between the Tokina AT-X 116 PRO DX AF 11-26 f2.8 and the Nikkor 10-24 AF-S DX 3.5 - 4.5G ED. I know the Tokina won't AF on the D3100 and the Nikkor will. The Tokina is also heavier which does worry me a bit. I can get the Tokina about $200 cheaper than the Nikkor. Does anyone have any experience with these lenses? Would love to hear some opinions.

[rene52]

Sorry this may be of no help but - the info you supplied on both seem to point me at the Tokina - why you ask - well because it seems to be the 'faster' of the 2 lens, I get this from the F numbers supplied which is based on the lower the F stop ability of the lens is to make the lens faster.

I don't think this is of real help but just something to think about.

[Bennymiata]

I can't help you with the Nikon lens, but I have the Tokina on my Canon, and it's a wonderful lens.
It isn't big or heavy, and because it is such a wide angle lens, manual, focussing is not so critical as it has a huge depth of field.

[fillum]

Sorry Lplates, I can't help with any specifics on the lenses you've listed either. Just wanted to mention that if you're looking to use the lens as a general 'walk-around' rather than specifically as an ultra-wide, the extra 8mm at the "long" end of the Nikkor might be handy. (Of course you can shoot at 16mm and crop, but you'd be losing a chunk of resolution).

Also wanted to check whether you've looked at the Sigma 10-20mm? Comes in 2 flavours - f/3.5 (~$600) and f/4-5.6 (~$450) - both of which will autofocus on your D3100. I have the f/4-5.6 and it's a good performer for the money. I don't use it a lot, but when I do it tends to be at the 10mm end, so the difference in max aperture is not an issue for me. The f/4-5.6 takes 77mm filters and the f/3.5 takes 82mm filters which might be a consideration.

I believe that Tamron do a 10-24mm but I don't know anything about it.

Apologies for possibly adding to the conundrum :)...


Cheers.

[Xebadir]

Sorry this may be of no help but - the info you supplied on both seem to point me at the Tokina - why you ask - well because it seems to be the 'faster' of the 2 lens, I get this from the F numbers supplied which is based on the lower the F stop ability of the lens is to make the lens faster.


IMHO I would disagree here. Just because a lens is "faster" doesn't necesarily mean it is better. Given you are planning to share this lens between a D7000 and a D3100 I would suggest going the Nikon, chances are if you have the Tokina you aren't going to be using it MF on the D3100. Both will take great pictures, but unless you really need the aperture the Nikon is probably a better choice. For a third complete curve ball, consider a Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 or the F3.5 version - fantastic little lens that will autofocus on both bodies and won't leave you wanting, plus its a good price.

[Glenda]

Thanks everyone for your advice. I wasn't really concerned about the f stop as I already have a 17-50 2.8 and a 35mm 1.8 which I love for low light. Will also look at the Sigma as I think the AF will sway me most. So many choices and I tend to read so many reviews my brain just gets confused.

[Eberbachl]

Get the Tokina.

Don't worry about lacking AF on your D3100... at that focal length your depth of field is so huge manual focus is dead easy. REALLY easy.

Grab it and enjoy - a spectacular lens.

;)

[zollo]

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?101779-Red-rain-rock

this ^^^ was taken with the Tokina 11-16 and d7000. i would highly recommend the tokina, especially over sigma, but the nikons too

[Chayelle]

Three ounces difference in the lenses you mentioned: how important is
the weight to you? To me, depending on what I am carrying, weight
does become important.

I would like to throw in another lens for consideration... the 10.5 fisheye.
This lens is 6 to 9 ounces lighter in weight, can be straightened via Fisheye-Hemi,
or, you could enjoy the fisheye fun. I don't believe it would be difficult to mf
on your D3100 either...

A comparison:
Tokina 11-16 ... 19.3 oz ... $659 new
Sigma 8-16 ... 19.2 oz ... $699 new
Sigma 10-20 ... f4-5.6 ... 16.6 oz ... $479 new
10-20 f3.5 ... 18.3 oz ... $649 new
Nikon 10-24 ... 16.3 oz ... $839 new
Nikon 10.5mm fisheye ... 10.75 oz ... $700 new
Sigma 10mm fisheye ... 16.8 oz ... $649 new (has BIM so you could af on D3100)

Hope this is helpful to you! :)

[wolffman]

I've got the Nikon and its great. I don't know if the ultra wides really benefit from the big apertures like the sigma but I havent used one. You need to be really quite careful about your exposure when you can fit so much into the frame and it's easy to blow out the sky.
The zoom range for the Nikon is really usable

[Glenda]

Thanks to all for the advice - I have ordered the Nikon - the weight plus the AF swayed me and I am very happy with the IQ of all my Nikon lenses. Now I'll just have to practice using it, and making sure I check the viewfinder well, especially on the sides.

[steved200]

I have both the D7000 and the D3100, and the Nikon 10-24 lens.
Recent trip to China it worked flawlessly. The walkaround lenses we used were the 10-24 on the D3100 and the 28-300 on the D7000. You have all bases covered with these two lenses. Threw in the 50 1.4 just in case it got really dark, and the kit lens from the D3100 in case something broke.
Get the 10-24 you will love it.

[Banjo]

I recently brought the 10 24 lens. Works well.

:)

[ElizabethAtkinson]

I only recently got my Tokina 11-16 (at a good price) and love it. It is my only non-Nikon lens for my D7000 but the photo quality is excellent.