Forgotten in its old age

by Aditya

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Take the 2-minute tour ×
Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am looking for a wide angle lens for my D90, between 12 and 18mm focal length, preferably a prime, because I like fast(er) and cheap(er) lenses.

Any recomendation ?

Thanks

share|improve this question
2  
I think you need to give us more to go on. What sort of photography do you do? Why are you unsatisfied with your existing gear? What lenses have you considered? Open-ended equipment recommendation requests like this are generally considered off-topic. –  Reid Aug 14 '10 at 15:43
    
Are you asking for a 12-18mm FF FOV equivalent? –  Alan Aug 14 '10 at 16:37
    
@Alan - 12mm is extremely wide even on APS-C, so probably not. –  Reid Aug 14 '10 at 16:59
5  
@Reid - I don't find this particularly open-ended. Choices are fairly narrow in this range, and his constraints (fast, cheap) are stated pretty clearly. In fact, I think this is a better "what should I do" than the typical "I've tried X, Y, Z, prefer Q photography, what is the best?" as all those letters tends to be quite extraneous. –  ex-ms Aug 14 '10 at 17:38
1  
OK, that's fair. I guess I'm underwhelmed by the question because the right answer seems like it would be a list of F-mount lenses between 12 and 18mm, which isn't a very interesting answer (and doesn't have good archival value, as that stuff changes). –  Reid Aug 14 '10 at 19:55

8 Answers 8

While I generally encourage people to consider primes over zooms, you're definitely in the territory here where zooms start to become more plausible. Before getting into that, a recommendation:

Your best bet is probably a DX zoom in the 10-24 range. You'll lose a stop of speed compared to the 14mm prime (most are f/4), but they will be much cheaper (~50%) and a little wider. I've never tried it personally, but the Tokina 11-16mm has a good reputation.

On to the comparison. Primes, like you say, are typically cheaper, faster, and of higher quality. But when it comes to ultra-wides, the situation changes a little, as ultra-wide primes have never been at the level of simplicity and well-corrected design that's been possible in the 35mm+ range, and zooms are rapidly improving. Sticking to Nikon only, here's the interesting comparison:

 Zooms:
   Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8    $1800
   Nikkor 12-24mm f/4 DX   $950

 Primes:
   Nikkor 24mm f/2.8       $425
   Nikkor 20mm f/2.8       $600
   Nikkor 14mm f/2.8       $1700

 Fast Primes:
   Nikkor 24mm f/1.4       $2100

So even considering only the 14mm area, the fancy, fast zoom is the same speed as the 14mm prime, and only barely more expensive (one downside: much larger). Throw in even one other prime in the range it covers, and it's cheaper in absolute terms. The DX zoom is half the price, only one stop slower. Quality is harder to show in a chart, but Nikon says the 14-24 is as sharp as the primes in that range; pretty bold, but going on the review/testimonials I've read, they seem to be living up to that particular claim rather well.

share|improve this answer
    
The 14-24 is a stellar lens, the envy of a lot of Canon shooters (like the 85 f/1.2L is for Nikon shooters and the 24 f/1.4 until Nikon released their version). –  Matt Grum Mar 22 '11 at 22:17

Late to the party, but the obvious choice is the Tokina f2.8 11-16mm.

Cheaper, faster, and sharper (really!) than anything in that focal length except for the Nikon and Canon 14mm primes (which are rather expensive for most people). Ken Rockwell did a fairly detailed review of it. I certainly like mine.

share|improve this answer
    
I own one of it and it is a very good choice. I especially like the f/2.8 which allows to make pictures inside whitout a tripod (and just increasing a little the ISO if needed). I will soon complete the focal range with the 16-85mm from Nikon. –  ruffp Mar 10 '13 at 19:46

I believe there are no wide-angle primes specifically for APS-C cameras. There are zooms that start at 10 or 12 mm. The widest available primes are 14mm and those are full-frame and very expensive. I suggest you look into Nikon or third-party ultra-wide DX zooms. Some reviews can be found at photozone.de.

share|improve this answer
    
List of wide-angle DX zooms for Nikon can be found here: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/2231/… –  Karel Aug 14 '10 at 16:54
2  
Suggest clarifying "no wide-angle primes for APS-C cameras" to "no dedicated DX primes". There are wide-angle primes for APS-C cameras; they just happen to have full-frame coverage, but will happily work on the smaller formats as well. –  ex-ms Aug 14 '10 at 19:54
    
@matt: True, fixed. –  che Aug 15 '10 at 9:33
    
Well, there's also wide-angle primes designed for APS-C cameras. Pentax has three: DA 21mm f/3.2 Limited since 2006, the DA 14mm f/2.8 since 2004, and the DA 15mm f/4 Limited since 2009. Of course, that's no good for Nikon users. (There's the Samyang 8mm f/3.5 fisheye, but that might not count.) –  mattdm Mar 22 '11 at 20:45

Seems like a 14mm f/2.8 is a great way to go.

The Pro-Optic version is a whole lot cheaper if you're on a tight budget, but I would have to believe that the quality is a lot higher with the Nikon.

share|improve this answer

As of April 2, 2013, the answer is a Tokina AF AT-X 124 PRO DX II 12-24mm. (Tokina will introduce a newer lens this month) The DX II WILL autofocus with the Nikon D3100 and D5000, both are adequate cameras. Keeping in mind that an APS-C censor is already "cropped" from a full 35mm equivalent, wide is not as wide in real values, it's an equivalent in DX. ALL the reviews of UWA lenses I've read point to this lens for quality of build, and images. There really isn't an (affordable) prime lens for an APS-C (Nikon DX) other then a 10mm fisheye. Tokina 11-16 will not autofocus, Tamron is not quality in 10-24mm, and the 10-24mm Nikon is twice the price. Most reviews I've read by owners, and Ken Rockwell, who gives the best advice for me, the prosumer/better than average photographer but not able to spend like a pro type, say that their wide angle lens stays at the 10mm range on their camera with the Nikon 10-24, and they REALLY like having the 2 extra mm on the wide end, and image barreling (distortion at the edges) is normal and within acceptable limits, especially if you are able to correct for this in camera or on a pc. I, after much research will go for the Nikon 10-24mm, cause I wanna shoot WIDE and can afford the extra $400. Best for the money hands down the Tokina AF AT-X 124 PRO DX II 12-24mm. Found one used on craigslist for $350. I gave up my search for a prime.

share|improve this answer

If you do end up going with a zoom, look at the older Sigma 10-20mm and the Tokina 12-24mm.

share|improve this answer

I also looked into this issue for quite a few years, since my D70s. If for automatic focusing prime lens, the only option seems to fit this question in a reasonable price would be the old Sigma 18/3.5 or 18/2.8 lens. I did used the 18/3.5-af for a few times and it's not a bad stuff for its price, which usually around $150. The Sigma 18/2.8, however, I only saw MF version once and I cannot confirm whether it has a af version or not. Yet the Sigma 18/2.8 seems to be even older and cheaper then the /3.5 lens.

Also if you have $200~250 budget then you can go and buy the Tokina ATX Pro-17/3.5 ASPH. It is a very fine lens and in fact I still keep the Tokina 17 now because it's good for full frame as well -- and it is the last 17 or 18mm AF prime lens in production until 2006.

If you expand you option a little bit then you can go for the Sigma 20/1.8, which you still have equivalent 30mm on aps-c camera, and its a HSM lens so it's faster. But it'll double the price up to $500 or more.

The only 14mm AF prime lens beside the legendary Nikon AF 14/2.8D-ED would be the Tamron SP-14/2.8 af lens. In fact the the Nikon 14/2.8 is acturally oem of the tamron 14/2.8 so they're the same optic and performance.. and also the same price.. It would be no necessary to spend $2000 on a APS-C camera prime lens.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.