wide angle for D7100

What would you suggest for a wide angle lens for the D7100. I have preordered one with the Nikon 70-300 lens. I would like to add a wide angle for traveling.

tomtek1221 said:

tomtek1221 wrote:

What would you suggest for a wide angle lens for the D7100. I have preordered one with the Nikon 70-300 lens. I would like to add a wide angle for traveling.

Click to expand...

For an APS-C format camera, anything shorter than 35mm can be considered a wide angle. How "wide" do you want to go? Landscape, architecture, family gathering indoors ???



JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

Landscape

Anything in the 10mm-24mm range will be good which pretty much means looking at the Wide angle DX zooms from Nikon,Sigma,tonika ect. It all depends on how much money you want to spend.

tomtek1221 said:

tomtek1221 wrote:

Landscape

Click to expand...

I think the APS-C WA lens of choice still is the 12-24 mm f/4, but beware of some distortion at the lowest FL. You could also get a 16-35 f/4, an FX lens, that would be 24-53mm equivalent, not that WA, but would get you innto "normal"FL range. The 17-55 f/2.8 standard DX zoom is also a very good lens, likely the best all-around lens for the D7100. It's not that "wide-angle", more like 27mm equiv laent at the lowest FL.


I have used the 12-24 extensively with the D7000, it produces very good images.

I'd stick to Nikkors, but many Nikon users have the Sigma 10-20mm zoom. But you have to see if it'll owrk well with the D7100, since it's an old lens.

tomtek1221 said:

tomtek1221 wrote:

Landscape

Click to expand...

I like the 10-24 Nikkor. Goes from too wide to near-normal with good quality over the whole range (at least on a D300; maybe the D7100 sensor would tax it some).






Rocks at Joshua Tree






--
Leonard Migliore

tomtek1221 said:

tomtek1221 wrote:

Landscape

Click to expand...

While landscape can be done @ any focal length, many shooters find the 17 or 18mm to 50 or 55mm range just about right for most landscapes. If you can live without f/2.8, there are may inexpensive & sharp options. For the money, the Nikkor 18-55 kit lens is tough to beat. If you want a better built lens, there are many options, but the Nikkor 16-85 is one of the better ones. There are also several 3rd party lenses in this range which are excellent. The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (if you opt for more speed) is excellent and fairly priced. Good Luck

JT

moony16 said:

moony16 wrote:

moony16 said:

tomtek1221 wrote:

Landscape

Click to expand...

While landscape can be done @ any focal length, many shooters find the 17 or 18mm to 50 or 55mm range just about right for most landscapes. If you can live without f/2.8, there are may inexpensive & sharp options. For the money, the Nikkor 18-55 kit lens is tough to beat. If you want a better built lens, there are many options, but the Nikkor 16-85 is one of the better ones. There are also several 3rd party lenses in this range which are excellent. The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (if you opt for more speed) is excellent and fairly priced. Good Luck

Click to expand...

I'm happy with the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8. Good glass, fast focus, image stabilization.

--

Radu
www.raduray.com

tomtek1221 said:

tomtek1221 wrote:

What would you suggest for a wide angle lens for the D7100. I have preordered one with the Nikon 70-300 lens. I would like to add a wide angle for traveling.

Click to expand...

The very best is the Nikon 12-24mm. The Nikon 10-24 is also excellent. The Tokina 12-24 is also and excellent wide angle zoom and at wide anges, even sharper than the Nikons.

These give you the equivalent of 18mm (quite wide) to 35mm (a good, slightly wide focal length for ordianary shooting. One of these and the 70-300 should give you adequate coverage for travel.

tomtek1221 said:

tomtek1221 wrote:

What would you suggest for a wide angle lens for the D7100. I have preordered one with the Nikon 70-300 lens. I would like to add a wide angle for traveling.

Click to expand...

I need to add, 1 man's landscape lens is not necessarily another's. Some people find 8 or 10mm to 20 or 24mm range nice for landscapes, but not everyone does. You need to determine, before you make a purchase, what focal lengths you want to cover for your ladscape needs. There is a difference between Wide Angle and Ultra Wide Angle. Also, your lens need not be a zoom--you can pick a nice prime or two.

So decide these things 1st

1) Make a budget

2) Select the focal range you want (Prime or Zoom)

3) Research what time permits concerning your options

4) Make a purchase, reporting back to us, with pics, Seriously, good luck

JT

EVERY time someone asks about recommendations for a wideangle DX zoom, no consensus is ever achieved. Ever. Every one has their favorites. I don't believe their is one dominant zoom.

Nikon 12-24, Nikon 10-24, Tokina 12-24, Tokina 11-16... I don't think you can go wrong with any of these. One note about the 11-16 - the f/2.8 is nice but this lens should be treated as a wide-angle prime zoom.

I've never tried any of the Sigmas or Tamrons.

Wanted to second the vote on the 16-85. It is a 3.5-5.6 so not a fast lens, but a great all around walking lens and a good match to your 70-300. Excellent build quality. Sharpness, color and contrast are also hard to beat.

With a 3.5 minimum aperature, you will have a hard time getting shallow DOF shots in portraits. For little money you can add the 50/1.8, probably the best lens for the money in the Nikon lineup.

There was plenty of light outside today so I went out to take a few test snaps with my recently acquired 12-24 Nikkor which I got from eBay used. Light outside was very bright and contrasty. I used a polarizer.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/n6b3cd05fis07h8/b1t15JSsv_/12-24mm f4 Nikkor

This lens is $900-$1000 brand new. I don't recommend anyone going that route. This can easily be had for $500-600 used on eBay.

The Tokina 11-16 is very good UWA. Well it could use a longer range, but to have an f2.8 for environmental portraiture is quite unique among ultra wide lenses.

I second the Tamron 17-50 f2.8. The non-VC is better than the stabilized one though in sharpness.

tomtek1221 said:

What would you suggest for a wide angle lens for the D7100. I have preordered one with the Nikon 70-300 lens. I would like to add a wide angle for traveling.

Click to expand...

just got a 70-300 for my d300. really like it, but not used to telephotos. for wide shots, i've been using a 16-85 for a few years now. its an amazing lens, especially if you can find a used one for a good price. i also have the sigma 10-20 and have been very happy with it. try craigslist or keh.com.

reviews of all three lenses can be found at slrgear.com.

I've used the Sigma 10-20mm on a Fuji S2, S5, D70, D200, D300, D300S and D800 with no problems -- should expect the same with the D7100.

It's a great lens -- just as good as the Nikkor, in my opinion, for a bit less; and you should be able to pick up a used copy for a good deal, although they're still available new. I paid $600 new about seven years ago.

I agree, for a wide/standard tele. I used both versions (non-VC and VC), and there isn't much difference. I've been impressed by the sharpness of both those lenses -- so much so that I considered getting the 24-70 f2.8 VC when I bought my D800 last year. I couldn't tell the difference in most shots between it and the Nikkor 24-70 (which I bought, although VC would be a benefit.)

However, the VC version is more prone to dust. I also had to send in my non-VC for servicing as the zoom ring started to wobble a bit -- quality control can be an issue with the build quality, although I've never heard any complaints about the optics. With the five-year Canadian warranty (may be similar elsewhere), it's still worth every penny.


One more thing - there are Chinese-made and Japanese-made versions of the non-VR Tamron. A friend of mine had the Japanese, while mine had a "Made in Chine" engraving. Other than that, there was no difference at all (besides the fact that his stayed in one piece, but it was used mainly in a studio whereas mine was bumped and jostled about outside most of its life).

When I originally purchased this lens seven years ago, I tried out the Sigma and Nikkor f2.8 versions. Both others were more expensive and heavier (especially the Nikkor). The Sigma's optical quality was very poor (although the Sigma 17-70 variable aperture tele is not bad, and has a bit more reach).


All in all, you've got a number of good choices.

16-85mm f3.5-5.6?

If you only other lense is going to be the 70-300 you might want something to cover the "normal range". The 16-85mm covers wide thru short telephoto.

It's not as wide as some, but it is fairly wide - from memory FOV is 85 degrees or so.