Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Yeah buddy! I got the go ahead! UWA's

profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
I shoot for the college paper, and I convinced my parents that I need a new lens, so for christmas they are going to get me an inexpensive lens. I would like to get the Nikon af-d 80-200 2.8, but they wont give me that much.. So for now Im going to get a nice ultra wide angle. Right now I am considering the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 & the Tokina 12-24 f/4. 
Based on whta Ive read, the Tokina has better QC so better chance Ill get a good lens, but I wish it was a 10 and not at 12mm. (and yes it is that big of a difference, I got to play with the Nikon 10 & 12 today) Another pro for the tokina is that a fixed aperature f/4 which will  have to be acceptable for now.
Pros for the Sigma is that its wider, and an older lens so its more likely I can find a good used one. On average a used sigma is looking about $50 more than the tokina.

Am I over looking any lenses in the $3-400 price range? Help me decide!
Nov 17 2009 10:00PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
someone has to have an opinion.
Nov 18 2009 11:23AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61090 - Karma: 118,060
I've used the sigma 10-20 for canon, loved it. 10mm 4f, not bad especially for like what 350?
Nov 18 2009 11:47AM
0 0
profile picture
Smokey.
Posts: 236 - Karma: 26
how about the tokina 11-16 f2.8? just about 600 bucks.
Nov 18 2009 12:24PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61090 - Karma: 118,060
He said 300-400 range.
Nov 18 2009 12:53PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
yep.. that could be used price as well.. and I think the 10-20 is a little more, did how slow the lens is ever bother you?
Nov 18 2009 12:58PM
0 0
profile picture
1080ski
Posts: 4424 - Karma: 191
I have that and its pretty dope. If you have something at the 18-35 range i would definitely go with this. It is awesome for wide angle shots. I use it for my school newspaper shots all the time. Its pretty sharp too. The only downside (to me) is the limited focal length, but if you have something covering 18-35ish you should be all set.

and something to watch out for with really wide angle shots: dont put the subject anywhere near the edge or they will look all stretched out.

also: if you arent opposed to dropping some money of your own, have you thought about going 1/2 and 1/2 in on the 70-200 f2.8? I am doing that with my parents this xmas.
Nov 18 2009 9:26PM
0 0
profile picture
1080ski
Posts: 4424 - Karma: 191
BUT you probably wont find a used one for under 500 bucks or so (the 11-16). IMO its worth the money. check KEH or the fred miranda forums to see what they have.
Nov 18 2009 9:29PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
hmm, I would like the 11-16 2.8, but its too much out of my price range, if I was going to spend $600, I might as well get that Nikon 80-200 2.8 AF-D Ive been eying.
Right now I have a 17-50 Tamron fixed f/2.8 which Im fine with & a older film 70-210 4/5.6 so I figure go wider first, since I have a barely usable zoom.

Also, I have a Nikon D70s that Im not satisfied with, (slow fps, shotty 1600 iso, the d70 card reader issues) and my photo editor has a Canon 40d hes willing to sell for $400, should I make the switch? Naturally I would have to sell the Tamron, and I would probably just buy the canon version, but I would get to use all the schools lenses for the rest of the year. (16-35's, 28-70's, 70-200 2.8 IS)
Nov 18 2009 10:41PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61090 - Karma: 118,060
I only shot with it at a bright ass day at pc, so no.
Nov 19 2009 3:28AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)