Wide Angle Lenses for Nikon Bodies

I recently purchased a wide angle lens for my new Nikon D7000. I thought a lot about the wide angle lens options available for the camera and found there are essentially 5 options for people with Nikon DX bodies:

There is a fixed aperture (f/2.8) Tokina with a smaller range (11mm – 16mm), but I really wanted a lens with a larger range. This lens is going to cover the smaller end for me in my bag. Plus that Tokina is expensive… Then I debated for a long time which to get. So I went back to the inital reason why I wanted a wide angle lens: I wanted the exaggerated depth you can get with a really wide angle lens. That gave good arguments against one of the Nikons and the Tokina. That extra 2mm the Sigma and Tamron have really makes a big difference on DX a body. Granted, the Nikon glass is going to be really awesome, but it also costs a lot more for the 12-24 (~$250) and even more for the 10-24.  The Tokina is really tempting, and DPRreview makes it seem like a great lens. Even though it is a bit less expensive than the Sigma and Tamron, I decided that I did want that extra focal length.

Thus, I was left with the Sigma and Tamron. Eventually, it just came down to having used the Sigma quite a bit. A buddy of mine has the Sigma, and I’ve used it a number of times on photo trips. So far I’ve been really happy with the results. I typically shoot at either end of the zoom range (10mm or 20mm), and at both lengths, the center is really really sharp. However, at the corners, the lens isn’t quite as sharp. Though if one shoots between f/8 and f/11 (which I typically do), the lens ends up being sharper than wide open.

At 10mm, there is an interesting kind of distortion; about none at the center, with increasing distortion near the edges. Then, when at 20mm, almost no distortion.  I want the lens primarily for landscapes, and not architecture or people. So despite this distortion at the wide end, for me, it isn’t as big of a deal.  Plus, there is software that can fix this if I really need it fixed (DxO comes to mind).

The final complaint with the lens is minor chromatic aberration. I haven’t noticed chromatic aberration with the lens, but I think thats because of my insensitivity to certain colors (the colorblindness is at fault). Or, it hasn’t been so bad that I’ve actually noticed it, though I don’t believe I’ve ever looked for it. One aspect of the lens I have noticed is that depending on how the light hits the lens, interesting patterns can come up. For example, see the left side of the image below (click for a bigger version).

See the rainbow on the left side of the fence?

Both the Sigma and Tamron are lighter lenses with decent build quality. The Tokina is supposed to have a slightly better build quality than the Sigma, but since I’d handled the Sigma a bunch, I know what it feels like. It doesn’t seem cheap or toy like and that it will hold to up to a beating while hiking and being active. And the light heft helps when hiking or traveling far.  It is a bigger and wider lens, so it takes up a fair amount of space, especially with the lens hood, but I’m going to get that with almost any wide angle.

In all, I really like the Sigma; it was a known quantity and I’d taken some pictures I really liked with it. I ended up getting the f/4-5.6 version of the lens instead of the faster, fixed aperture (f/3.5) version available as that model is more expensive. For my uses, I decided that I don’t need that extra speed. If I do have lower light, I’ll turn up the ISO (the D7000 has great high ISO capabilities) or use a tripod.

Hopefully this helps others decide which lens they want as well. I’d definitely be curious to hear which lens others choose and why. And then I want to play with your lens :)

Posted on November 18, 2010 by streeter in photos and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://rohitsrealm.com Rohit

    Somewhat off-topic, but did you look at switching to a Nikon DSLR with a FX body? My D70 is getting old, and I’m thinking of investing in a new body, but I have lenses from the film days that I’d like to be able to salvage. In particular, I really like my 28 mm prime, but on the DX it’s basically useless (appears as approximately 43 mm due to crop factor). On the other hand, I don’t have a big investment in DX lenses. I’ve been out of the market a long time, so I’d be interested in what information your research yielded.

  • enzhewenhezenwe

    oh hay guess who else has the sigmama.

    Watch out for barrel distortion at wide eng. And funky polarizer effects at < 12mm.

  • http://www.chrisstreeter.com Streeter

    Rohit, I didn’t consider switching to an FX body yet. There are a couple reasons for it at this point. I like the smaller body the DX gives me. I’m not ready to lug around a big ass, heavy body like the D700 yet. Second, those lenses are expensive! I do have an f/1.8 50mm prime, which is an inexpensive lens, I’m not ready to plop down that much for FX lenses. Yes, it is sharper and should have better high ISO performance, but the D7000 is a huge step in the right direction. I like being able to stow my camera and lens in a bag when hiking and traveling. While doing both those, I’d rather be worried about a $1200 body than a $3000 body, which doesn’t even include whatever lenses I happen to have with me. And since this is still just a hobby for me (I’d love to travel and hike, take pictures and then get paid for it…), a full frame with the associated lenses just doesn’t make sense.

    Right now, the D7000 is what you’d want to upgrade to. It is 3 body generations newer than your D70, and two sensor generations newer. So you’ll notice a different immediately. The only current problem is getting one in a timely manner. They are backordered for months right now and are marked up a ton on Craigslist / eBay / Amazon used. Your best shot would be to find a local dealer who just got a shipment in.

    If you do decide to go full frame, there is rumored to be a D700 (the low end FX Nikon body) replacement in the next 5-6 months, which would be worth waiting for if you can. Definitely let me know what choice you go with.

  • steve

    hey chris!
    great website and fantastic photos. seems like your pretty pleased with your d7000. any complaints? how does it handle indoors without flash? i’m in the market for a new dslr and am also debating between the d7000 or moving to a d700. keep up the great photography!

  • http://www.chrisstreeter.com Streeter

    So far, the only complaint with the D7000 I have is that it doesn’t have a way to trigger remotely and take multiple shots, like what most cameras offer with the timer interface (wait 10 seconds, take X number of pictures). Why can’t I do that with the remote? I’ve done some shooting indoors without flash, and the clean high ISO definitely makes shooting indoors without a flash easy and nice. If you’re looking at the D700, and thus full frame, people are expecting it to be replaced in 2011. You also have to consider the investment FX lenses costs as well too.

    Do you run a photoblog of any sort? Where do you put your pictures at?

  • steve

    great insights. i’ll probably wait until the d700 refresh is announced so i can have a more accurate comparison of pricing (either with the refresh or the new price point for the d700). everything i’ve read seems to point to the d7000 as a superb high iso performer, which would be great for indoor shots without flash. the prices of the fx lenses is definitely intimidating. avoiding the 1.5x DX crop factor is intriguing.

    no real photo blog but i do have a gallery of sorts.
    http://stevechou.smugmug.com/

    pretty out of date but i’m without a camera for now. hope you had a great holiday season!

  • D7000 Nikon Review

    Hello there, I found your blog via Google while looking for a similar matter, your web site got here up, it looks good. I’ve bookmarked it in my google bookmarks.