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


TPF Noob!
Jun 25, 2013
Reaction score
Dubai, UAE
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
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 :p :lol:

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.
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.
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.
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.

Most reactions