Which Wide Angle To Buy?

Got mine here: http://buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=TK1224NA This is my third order from buydig -great service

RBFresno said:

My two biggest concerns with the Tokina would be that 1) it's not
really as wide as the Nikon (some say it's like 13.5) and 2) light
falloff toward the edges.

Click to expand...

If you believe the Popular Photography test (any test that results in decimal numbers has to be scientific, right?), they tested it at 12.59 - 23.26.

Here's the link... http://www.popphoto.com/assets/download/PP0405_TokinaLensTest.pdf

They don't have a test for the Nikkor (not shocking) so you can't make a direct comparison but I wouldn't be surprised if it is greater than 12 on the wide end as well but maybe by not quite as much. Lens manufacturers tend to round down on the wide end and round up on the tele end for obvious marketing purposes.

--
-Mike
http://www.pbase.com/ghostrider25

'Cameras don't take pictures... people do.'

Thanks for the reference!!
RB
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile

Allen George said:

Is it really that much sharper than the Sigma?

Click to expand...

The copy of Sigma I had was significantly softer than my current copy of Tokina (this is my second one - the first one was very soft, even while viewing on D70's LCD).

RBFresno said:

Really? This conflicts with the above reference. Who's right?

Click to expand...

Of course, I think I am right.

Have a look at the graphic on the upper right side, it shows the vignetting ("Randabdunklung") at 12/16/24 mm at f4 (left side of the graphic) and stopped down (right side).

On the left graphic, you see distortion ("Verzeichnung", tonnenförmig=barrel distortion), in the middle graphic the resolution (Gesamtwirkungsgrad).

I thought so too at first.

I tried out my kit lens and my 50mm on my camera. Absolutely no issues. I also don't remember it popping up on the first (squeaky) Sigma.
--
Terminal Musings: http://www.allengeorge.com

Hi,

I appreciate the references! However, my German (it IS German isn't it?) is on par with my Mandarin!

Just to impress you that I'm not completely helpless, I did find some words in the article that I was able to decipher:
-super
-sehr gut
-gut
-noch gut

-weniger nut (not sure about this one, but I get where it is on the rating scale!)

BTW, I believe light falloff is different from vignetting, the latter implying a mechanical intrusion onto the edges of the lens.

Anyway, I think I get it. They like the Tokina over the Nikon. Now, if I only knew whether they had representative samples of each!

Danke-schon!
RB
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile

Perhaps the issue still is with the camera's peripheral sensor alignment.... that is much (?) more vulnerable when a superwide f4 lens is employed versus lenses with shallower cones and wider apertures
--
Marabou Muddler

Hmm.

Well, if I get a superwide in December, I'll test it out again. If there's a problem, I'll send the camera into to Nikon Canada detailing the issue.

Do you know if Nikon Canada will have any problem with me reporting issues with a Sigma lens/Nikon camera combo?

Thanks,
Allen
--
Terminal Musings: http://www.allengeorge.com

I'm sure they will complain that they have no responsibility for peformance with non-Nikon lenses. Just try to lay hands on a copy of the Nikon equivalent lens and get the same problem to show up. And then only send in your cam body for adjustment. NEVER include the lens.
--
Marabou Muddler

You are right in that the article is in German (which is by far easier to learn than Mandarin) and that "light falloff" would be the right term. Thanks.

They test only one lens they get from the manufacturer. As we expect manufacturers to send them only good samples, we see from these tests what the design can do. (By the way, Sigma has a bad reputation for sample variation, Tokina and Nikon are both much better in that respect. From what I have read here, I consider the risk of getting a bad one very low.)

C'mon..... how else do you describe vignetting!? What else could those German photo fans be looking at while discussing distortion and CA!? It is light fall-off around the edges of an image. It does NOT have to be associated with "mechanical" intrusions into the field of view such as lens shades or stacked filters altho that is what can cause the image phenomenon called vignetting and generate a lot of forum discussion. You get vignetting when you use a DX lens on a full frame camera. The mechanical intrusion in that case i guess is the lens barrel itself. You get vignetting when you dodge the center of your print.

What the german article illustrates is the somewhat higher f4 vignetting seen at 12mm on the non-Nikon lens.... otherwise performance is pretty darn good. And most of us knew that.
--
Marabou Muddler

Pop photo has tested the Nikon and Tokina lenses recently. Both tested well but the Tokina faired a little better. The Nikon has AF-S but for wide angle focusing this is a very minor benefit.

After reading lots of reviews and examining test shots I chose to go with the Tokina and have not regretted it. The lens is very solidly constructed. It focuses plenty fast and the results are sharp. I paid $524 at a local shop here in Chicago.

I do notice a slight color shift between this lens and my Nikon glass. Probably due to different coatings. I wouldn't say either one was better. They are just a little different.
--
Steve

..for not giving you a reference on the difference between vignetting and light falloff (yes, there is a difference, though vignetting has been improperly used enough that it's starting to take on a broader, less accurate meaning).

Vignetting - A term that describes the darkening of the outer edges of the image area due to the use of a filter or add-on lens. Most noticeable when the zoom lens is in full wideangle ...
http://www.computerschool.net/dphoto/dictionary.html

http://www.photo.net/photo/optics/lensFAQ
Q18. What are vignetting and light falloff?

A. Vignetting is a reduction in light falling on the film far from
the center of the image that is caused by physical obstructions.
Light falloff is a reduction of light far from the center because of
fundamental optical reasons: First, an off-axis object sees a
foreshortened apparent aperture (entrance pupil) so less light is
collected. This results in a cos(theta) falloff, where theta is the
angle off axis. Second, in a rectilinear lens the solid-angle-to-area
magnification increases with cos^3(theta), spreading the light from a
patch near the edge over more film than if the patch had been near the
center. (The patch is presumed to face the camera at a constant very
large distance.) As a result there is an overall cos^4(theta)
falloff. The optical designer can compensate for these effects by
making the entrance pupil enlarge and tip when viewed from off the
optical axis. An alternative approach is to compensate by using a
filter whose density varies appropriately with distance from the
center.

RB
http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile

Considering optical quality, built, and price, to me it comes down to Tokina 12-24 and Sigma 10-20. I chose Sigma 10-20 but if I did it again I'll still have a hard time deciding.

Pros and cons of each:

Tokina 12-24:
+sharpness
+constant aperture
+built
+center pinch lens cap
-flare
-CA
-weight and size

Sigma 10-20:
+wider
+good flare resistance
+low CA
+low distortion
-vignetting (not completely clear until 10mm f/11 or 20mm f/16)
-edge not as sharp before f/8
-meter 0.3~0.7EV brighter than "other" lenses

It might be funny I listed the lens cap on Tokina as a plus. But it'll allows one to take off/put on lens cap without removing hood. Similar one from Nikon or Tamron costs than $10.

From use I haven't found the HSM or full-time manual focus overwrite of Sigma to be important.

However, Toknia may have its fair share of copy variation (just like Sigma might have). The copy I tested in store was soft on right side and Mikhail above mentioned his first copy was soft.

Anyway, I'm happy with my choice of Sigma 10-20mm. Even better was that I purchased it from B&H when it was $30 cheaper than Tokina ($469).

Photobug

lovespicyfood said:

I've been reading all the wide angle threads for quite some time
now in anticipation of a purchase.

Now that the Sigma 10-20 is out, the time has come to make a
decision...

This is the one lens that I was very interested in, but the few
threads I have read on it lead me to believe that although it is a
good lens, it is not on par w/ the other wide angles out there.

Price is a concern to me which basically makes the Nikon 12-24 out
of the question. That being said, it seems to me that the Tokina
12-24 is my best option for price and performance.

Any of you have thoughts on this? I appreciate your input.

Click to expand...

Just to add few comments. I was very impressed by Sigma's control of CA - saw virtually no CA in those typical "trees-against-white-sky" tests; Tokina is more prone to CA. Interestingly, I didn't see much vignetting from Sigma (and none from Tokina) - not at WA at largest aperture without filter, even with non-slim CPL there wasn't any starting from f8-9.5; maybe you don't want to put two filters on it ;-) Built is pretty good for both, although it could be just a matter of personal taste, I wouldn't say that one is better than another; although I don't like clutch AF/MF switch in Tokina and the fact that Sigma extends with zooming, although not much (5-7mm ?). Funny you've mentioned the caps - the Sigma's one is indeed difficult to put on with the hood attached. While 2mm doesn't sound as a big difference for some, Sigma is signifficantly wider than Tokina - that's exactly why I wanted Sigma. Probably I could go thru few samples and finally get the sahrp one, I just got somewhat frustrated with my previous experience with Sigma and with my WA luck (the order: not sharp 12-24 Sigma, not sharp 12-24 Tokina, not sharp 10-20 Sigma and finally 12-24 Tokina I like). Good luck with yours - that should be a fun lens. Eventually it would be very interesting to see what 11-18 Tamron is about.
Cheers

Mikhail,

You can see my posts about 10-20's vignetting in this thread (and the links in it):
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=14828697

Others with equally carefully testing (like Jeff.C) has confirmed my findings.

Of course factor of filter was taken out. It was tested early on to determined vignetting remainded the same with or without ONE filter (regular thickness). With two filters like CPL on top of UV, there's serious vignetting at 10mm but might be fine at 20mm (not tested). But anyway, vignetting is still the #1 issue I have with this lens, yet I decide to learn to live with it.

I liked the center pinch lens cap so much I spent $15 buying one (Nikon brand) for Sigma 18-50/2.8. It makes life easier.

I won't be surprise if the reality is that Tokina has less sample variation than 10-20. That's why after determining my Sigma copy "good enough", I'm clinging to it.

Tamron 11-18 takes good pictures too. Check out this thread:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=14792090

I believe all of the new ultra-wide zooms- Nikon 12-24, Tokina 12-24, Tamron 11-18, and Sigma 10-20 are excellent. Just that they also each has its own traits that the owners need to learn.

Photobug

Mikhail Bogdanov said:

Just to add few comments. I was very impressed by Sigma's control
of CA - saw virtually no CA in those typical
"trees-against-white-sky" tests; Tokina is more prone to CA.
Interestingly, I didn't see much vignetting from Sigma (and none
from Tokina) - not at WA at largest aperture without filter, even
with non-slim CPL there wasn't any starting from f8-9.5; maybe you
don't want to put two filters on it ;-) Built is pretty good for
both, although it could be just a matter of personal taste, I
wouldn't say that one is better than another; although I don't like
clutch AF/MF switch in Tokina and the fact that Sigma extends with
zooming, although not much (5-7mm ?). Funny you've mentioned the
caps - the Sigma's one is indeed difficult to put on with the hood
attached. While 2mm doesn't sound as a big difference for some,
Sigma is signifficantly wider than Tokina - that's exactly why I
wanted Sigma. Probably I could go thru few samples and finally get
the sahrp one, I just got somewhat frustrated with my previous
experience with Sigma and with my WA luck (the order: not sharp
12-24 Sigma, not sharp 12-24 Tokina, not sharp 10-20 Sigma and
finally 12-24 Tokina I like). Good luck with yours - that should be
a fun lens. Eventually it would be very interesting to see what
11-18 Tamron is about.
Cheers

Click to expand...