Good inexpensive wide-angle for FX?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by tfenne, Aug 15, 2008.

  1. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    I think NAS has driven me mad :eek:. I'm toying with the idea of selling my D300 and the handful of DX lenses I have and upgrading to a D700. Out of my DX lenses the only one I think I'd really miss is my Sigma 10-20mm. I'm rationalizing this to myself by telling myself I won't be laying out too much cash. So spending a large amount of additional cash, splurging on 14mm prime or 14-24mm would blow that!

    Are there any reasonably priced (ideally < $300, definitely < $500) ultra-wides or wides that perform nicely on FX? I'm open to pretty much anything - zoom or prime, nikon or other brand, AF or MF, new or used, just so long as it'll mount and meter on a D700. Can anybody help me out with a recommendation?
     
  2. rotxlk82

    rotxlk82

    Jul 20, 2007
    UK
    How wide do you want to go? I have a 28mm F2.8 AIS lens which is pretty wide on full frame, is cheap and very sharp.
     
  3. cotdt

    cotdt

    Jul 14, 2007
    Bay Area, USA
    Sigma 15-30 of course, it's FX and a great replacement over their 10-20mm. It is faster lens, especially on FX, so keep in mind that you have to stop down to at least f/5.6 to get great results, but other than that, it's the poor man's 14-24.
     
  4. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    Sorry, should have said. I think probably at least 20mm since my 10-20mm on DX would be 15mm equivelant, and I tend to shoot it at the wide end most of the time. Thanks though!
     
  5. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    Thank you! The sigma 15-30 looks perfect - I've no idea how I hadn't found this by myself. I've been looking high and low and only really found 20mm primes that seemed to be in the price and performance range. Not sure how I overlooked this one. Thank you so much for the pointer!

    I can feel the D700 order getting closer :biggrin:
     
  6. I just sold my Sigma 15-30mm EX and part of me already misses it. I used it on DX with great results (crop put things right in its sweet spot). What I loved most about it was its warm, rich colors. That said, I wasn't using it enough to justify it and consolidated my wide angle and travel-zoom needs into one lens, an 18-200mm.

    15-30mm EX's go anywhere from $225 - $275 used on here, around $300 used from KEH, and $375+ new online. If you can pick one up for under $250 it's really a steal, and still a great lens at around $300.
     
  7. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    Thanks. Yeah, the 20/2.8 AIS is pretty much what I'd come up with as well. Seems like a good value and reasonably wide. The Sigma 12-14 looks good but is probably a little more than I want to spend. That said, maybe a prime or the Sigma 15-30 now and then the 12-24 later when I've gotten over my upgrade spending.
     
  8. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    Thanks Stephen - it's good to hear another vote for the 15-30 since it's in my price range :smile:. I'm going in the opposite direction - I use my Sigma 10-20mm way more than my standard zoom range so I'm probably going to sacrifice my 18-200 to the upgrade. And thanks for the tip on keh - I see they have one in EX condition right now for only $286. Woot!
     
  9. mood

    mood

    Jun 27, 2007
    suburbia, ny
    how about the Nikon 18-35 ?
    pretty decent performance at F8-11

    just a thought
     
  10. gugs

    gugs

    490
    Feb 24, 2006
    Belgium
  11. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    Do you guys not find the distortion distracting at the wide end? I was looking at the Photozone review for the 18-35 and the distortion seems pretty extreme at the wide end - 3% seems like it'd be pretty distracting.
     
  12. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest

    simple, Sig 15 2.8 diag fish-eye...about $500 brand new...;-)
     
  13. I don't think Tim wanted a fisheye, did you Tim?
     
  14. mood

    mood

    Jun 27, 2007
    suburbia, ny
    it does have some distortion, yes
    and probably better performance on DX body

    I used it like I use my 18-70
    20mm and up

    I think for the $$, not a bad deal
    however for my DX use, the 18-70 is just as good, if not better, for even less money

    if price wasn't a factor, I would have the 17-35 and call it a day
     
  15. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    Right you are! Maybe one day I'll "get" fisheyes. But whenever i look at a fisheye picture I get kinda queasy from all the crazy curves :eek:
     
  16. Nuteshack

    Nuteshack Guest


    trust me, i don't care for fish..the images are nothing like the 10.5
     
  17. tfenne

    tfenne

    125
    Apr 10, 2008
    Cambridge, MA
    I see what you mean now! I went looking for some samples and it's nothing like the 10.5 fisheye samples I've seen posted. There's some curvature but not the crazy-OMG-the-world-is-melting type I've come to associate with fishes. Another one to consider.

    Have also been reading a lot of good reviews of the Sigma 12-24 on full-frame. It's a little bit pricey but 12mm on FF. Wow!
     
  18. I had a Sigma 15-30. That lens was freaking sharp. I must of had a darn good copy! Too bad I sold it!
     
  19. scooptdoo

    scooptdoo Guest

    sigma 20mm 1.8 is a very nice wide for 300 bucks new.