Full Frame wide angle lenses Sigma 12-24 vs Tokina 16-28

ammar_frz · Jun 25, 2013

Hey guys,
This is my first post here.
Just wanted some help.
I recently just got a Nikon D600, and i wanted a wide angle to go with it..
Im getting confused between the 12-24 and 16-28
Both have their pros and cons
Anyone who has one or both of these would tell me which one is better?
Or are there any other wide angles within 1000$?
Din't get time to do my homework online

cybergarbage · Jun 30, 2013

Hello,

I believe the 12-24 is a DX lens. I looked at many wide angles before settling for the Nikon 18-35 f/3.5-4.5 lens. This is actually pretty equal to the 12-24 in terms of 1.5 cropped. This is an FX lens and relatively new from Nikon. It is around $750. It is very sharp, hardly no distortion, and can use standard 77mm filters. I highly recommend it.

480sparky · Jun 30, 2013

The 12-24 is a DX lens. If you're wanting FX glass, then look at the 14-24... it's the current benchmark for it's class.

Nikon doesn't offer a 16-28 right now. You're looking at either the 16-35 f/4, or a Tokina.

Derrel · Jun 30, 2013

The Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 and the Nikkor 18-35 f/3.5~4.5 (the NEW design, G-series) are tested and scored here:

DxOMark - Compare lenses

I saw a clean, nice used Nikkor 16-35mm f/4 VR for $1,050 this week.

I think any of these three lenses would be handy--but to me, the 35mm on the top end is a big advantage.

All three lenses, the Tamron 16-28, Nikon 18-35 G-series, and the 16-35 VR-G are pretty close in performance optically. For the money spent, the best value new, and in resale terms, is the Nikkor 18-35 G-series. The Tamron will lost value the minute you buy it.

cybergarbage · Jun 30, 2013

I totally agree with Derrel. I should have clarified my post. I did buy the Nikon 18-35 G series and I am very pleased with it. I find that optically and for the value and features mentioned it meets my needs perfectly. Your needs, budget or requirements may differ. Thanks.