Tokina 12-24, Nikon 12-24, or the Nikon 17-55

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by RKnecht, Jul 10, 2007.

  1. I used to use my D70 18-70 "kit lens" for wide angle needs, but since I "gave" the D70 to my wife to use, I need another wide angle lens. The way I see it is, I have 3 lenses to choose from. The Tokina 12-24, Nikon 12-24, or the Nikon 17-55. My main question is this...are the 12-24s really that much "wider" than the 17-55? Would I gain anything by going with the 12-24 over the 17-55? Any input would be greatly appreciated. BTW, I plan on using this lens on both my D2x and D2h, with possibly an occasional D70 shoot.
     
  2. 12mm is VERY MUCH wider than 17mm. Remember on a Nikon DSLR the 5mm is similar to 7.5mm on film. I suggest you go to a store and shoot both 12 and 17 and compare. The Tokina 12-24 is very nice for the price.

    Craig


     
  3. Sunesha

    Sunesha

    183
    May 3, 2007
    Malmoe, Sweden
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2017
  4. weiran

    weiran

    966
    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    17mm = 26mm which isn't very wide.
    12mm = 18mm which is classed as ultra-wide.
    Only way to get wider is Sigma 10-20mm (which isn't as sharp as the Tokina) or a fisheye.
     
  5. Yes, 12mm is DEFINITELY wider than 17mm and makes a significant difference when shooting in tight spaces.
     
  6. I just ordered the Tokina 12-24 after reading the other thread. Thanks for the replies.
     
  7. Well, I see you've made your decision, but I thought I would post again my spreadsheet which gives a pretty good estimate of the horizontal, vertical, and diagonal angle of view (AOV) of various focal lengths on a DX sensor. These are not exact, since different lens constructions can change things a bit, but they give a pretty good comparison:

    132717005-L.

    The table gives AOV in angular degrees. For example, 18mm gives a 67 degree view angle, whereas 10mm gives about a 100-degree view angle.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 11, 2007
  8. Jim, thanks for that chart. I printed it out. The chart, when combined with the pictures in the link David posted, really clears things up for me. I think I made the right decision going with a 12-24 over the 17-55.
     
  9. If you are interested I will be happy to share the original spreadsheet. Just send me your e-mail address.

    My chart doesn't refer to any specific lens; it is just the theoretical AOV of a normal lens. Obviously, it doesn't apply to fisheye lenses.
     
  10. I didn't want to make a new thread since this is relevant to my question, I hope the thread starter won't mind..

    Is there anyone w/ experience on using the Sigma 10-20, Tokina 12-24 and Nikkor 12-24? I would like to know what they think and such. Money isn't an issue for me but as far as I've been reading reviews, each gets good ratings and all are similar and not too far apart. The only thing is that the Nikkor is about $500 more.



    And I do hope that B&H, Adorama, or Samy's gets the 17-55 soon. I want to purchase that lovely lens. I've been dreaming about it for such a long time.
     
  11. VoidRaven

    VoidRaven

    581
    Jul 13, 2006
    Lagrange, OH
    What is this Samy's that everyone is referring to? A particular store chain in CA?
     
  12. weiran

    weiran

    966
    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    The Tokina 12-24mm is the best value IMO, it matches the Nikon on resolution but has a little more CA, easily correctable in post processing though.

    The Sigma I found to be very soft on the extreme edges, while the Nikon and Tokina remained reasonably sharp. I have the Nikon because I got a great deal on it, but otherwise I would've gone for the better built Tokina. The difference between 10 and 12mm is noticeable, but not extreme and I'd only go for the Sigma if you REALLY need 10mm or the HSM focusing.
     
  13. davidzvi

    davidzvi

    Apr 30, 2005
    Massachusetts
    David
    I know many may not like his reviews but I haven't seen a more complete comparison of the Nikon, Tokina, Tamron, and Sigma.

    Look here.
     
  14. Yes it is a store chain in Southern California.
     
Loading...