Full Frame Wide angle lens on DX perspective

[SunnyHours]

Hey I've been wanting a wide-angle lens for a while. I like to invest in fast lenses, and usually prefer primes.
It seems the only fast wide angle primes are all FX format. So I'm wondering how much the perspective is altered from the Full Frame.

I have the 35mm 1.8G which I love!
However I'm not sure the 28mm will be that much wider and this is the reason I'm going for a 20mm.
Is there only Nikon and Sigma that makes a 20mm?

In the super wide-angles, are there other choices without/with minimal distortion?

Thanks for your answers in advance :thumbup:

 

[kundalini]

With the Nikkor 20mm f/2.8, I've found there is some vignetting and softness in the corners on an FX body. TBH, I don't remember shooting it on a DX. However, the small amount of cropping (for the corners) usually isn't a problem for me. If you want UWA and a zoom on DX, I have the 12-24mm and can nothing bad about it.

 

[KmH]

I used to have the AF-S 12-24 DX f/4G. Great lens, very little barrel distortion, sharp focus.

I posted a series of images I made with the 12-24, mostly at 12 mm, here: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-gallery/206956-corn-today.html

 

[SunnyHours]

Thanks for the replies! I'd actually like to stay in the AF-D (or AF-S D) for the wide angle...I'm planning on getting a Nikon film body in a short while (till' I cash that Gov check)...Are there any wide angle zooms that Nikon has made in the past?

 

[molested_cow]

There is a AF-D F2.8 20-35mm. I actually tried it out for a while. It's a heavy, but solidly built lens. The distortion towards the edges is more severe than the 20mm prime. Also, the closest focus distance is about 1.5' vs the 20mm prime's 8 inches. I ended up returning that lens and went with my good'ol prime.

So it depends on your needs. If you really want a zoom, that's pretty much the only less expensive option on the AF-D Nikkor offering.