get a wide angle?

[TeeZeeMee]

whats the difference between the nikon 12-24 F/4 G
to the 10-24 Nikon.

and what would be the difference between the Nikon and the Tokina, besides what looks like a few hundred bucks?

 

[vipgraphx]

IF you buy sigma only buy new as there quality control sucks! IF you buy used you will not be able to send it in for repair or exchange if needed. Sigmas are not guaranteed to work with nikon and many folks have had problems with them and have to send there lenses back for a new one.. Once you get a good one then from what I have heard they perform very well.

 

[TeeZeeMee]

IF you buy sigma only buy new as there quality control sucks! IF you buy used you will not be able to send it in for repair or exchange if needed. Sigmas are not guaranteed to work with nikon and many folks have had problems with them and have to send there lenses back for a new one.. Once you get a good one then from what I have heard they perform very well.

doesnt sound reassuring :/

 

[Nikon_Josh]

IF you buy sigma only buy new as there quality control sucks! IF you buy used you will not be able to send it in for repair or exchange if needed. Sigmas are not guaranteed to work with nikon and many folks have had problems with them and have to send there lenses back for a new one.. Once you get a good one then from what I have heard they perform very well.

doesnt sound reassuring :/

Vipgrahx is correct in what he is saying but I wouldn't worry too much about it too much, admittedly Sigma do not have quality control as good as Nikon does. But Sigma makes great lenses, I have a 10-20 which I bought used and is a perfectly great lens at half the price of the Nikon equivalent. I have a Sigma 50 1.4 which is amazing and produces stunning bokehhh, I would not trade my Sigma 50 for any Nikon 50mm lens in a million years.

So the jist of what I am saying.. do not rule Sigma out of the equation due to the quality control issues. You will be ruling out some amazingly good lenses which are cheap to boot!

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Tokina 11-16 FTW

 

[cgipson1]

IF you buy sigma only buy new as there quality control sucks! IF you buy used you will not be able to send it in for repair or exchange if needed. Sigmas are not guaranteed to work with nikon and many folks have had problems with them and have to send there lenses back for a new one.. Once you get a good one then from what I have heard they perform very well.

doesnt sound reassuring :/

Vipgrahx is correct in what he is saying but I wouldn't worry too much about it too much, admittedly Sigma do not have quality control as good as Nikon does. But Sigma makes great lenses, I have a 10-20 which I bought used and is a perfectly great lens at half the price of the Nikon equivalent. I have a Sigma 50 1.4 which is amazing and produces stunning bokehhh, I would not trade my Sigma 50 for any Nikon 50mm lens in a million years.

So the jist of what I am saying.. do not rule Sigma out of the equation due to the quality control issues. You will be ruling out some amazingly good lenses which are cheap to boot!

I have actually had three different Sigma lenses...

a 50mm 1.4... good one first try.. love it!

A Sigma 150mm macro... had one copy.. backfocused really bad...sent it back

A Sigma 150-500 (wasn't expecting AWESOMENESS... that is a huge range! But I did expect a decent lens) Tried three different copies...
#1 backfocused beyond my bodies ability to correct.
#2 was only sharp between 225 and 425 (estimated.. and only at F11 and above)
#3 back to backfocusing... and it made a strange gritty noise when manually focusing. Felt gritty too.... sent it back and gave up!

 

[zamanakhan]

This is tough, I had the same dilemma, 10-24 or 11-16.The 11-16 is a faster 2.8 lens and is sharper according to most reviews compared to the sigma and the Nikon. This is all great but the 16mm at the long end means you can ONLY use this lens as a ultra wide, 16 mm is still very very wide. The sigma and Nikon have more range, I personally keep the sigma 10-20 As my walk around lens. You Don't need 2.8 with today's cameras, even if you are in doors you can bump up the ISo, and if you are outdoors you can shoot in low light and still get shutter speed fast enough to not blur the image with ultra wides. Having said that, 2.8 is always nice to have as it lets you freeze motion better and it's always better to use a lower iso. For me it was between those two, and with your current kit I would go with the 10-20 or Nikon 10-24 as you do not have anything in the less than 35 range. Have you considered maybe picking up a 18-55 used for $100 it maybe all you need, 18 is still pretty wide.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

doesnt sound reassuring :/

Vipgrahx is correct in what he is saying but I wouldn't worry too much about it too much, admittedly Sigma do not have quality control as good as Nikon does. But Sigma makes great lenses, I have a 10-20 which I bought used and is a perfectly great lens at half the price of the Nikon equivalent. I have a Sigma 50 1.4 which is amazing and produces stunning bokehhh, I would not trade my Sigma 50 for any Nikon 50mm lens in a million years.

So the jist of what I am saying.. do not rule Sigma out of the equation due to the quality control issues. You will be ruling out some amazingly good lenses which are cheap to boot!

I have actually had three different Sigma lenses...

a 50mm 1.4... good one first try.. love it!

A Sigma 150mm macro... had one copy.. backfocused really bad...sent it back

A Sigma 150-500 (wasn't expecting AWESOMENESS... that is a huge range! But I did expect a decent lens) Tried three different copies...
#1 backfocused beyond my bodies ability to correct.
#2 was only sharp between 225 and 425 (estimated.. and only at F11 and above)
#3 back to backfocusing... and it made a strange gritty noise when manually focusing. Felt gritty too.... sent it back and gave up!

Interesting! I guess sometimes it is the luck of the draw then, I have had two Sigma lenses and no issues whatsoever with either. Also, know another DSLR owner with about 3 Sigma lenses aswell, no problems whatsoever. So I don't know myself, I know Sigma have higher frequencies of lenses that have focussing issues but I think it's worth the risk still. But as you can imagine, I find it very hard to be critical of the Sigma QC issues when I am yet to experience these issues myself.

 

[zombi3butt]

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Tokina 11-16mm is the best choice on D90. It's [/FONT]faster, tougher than nikon 10-24. Besides, pay almost $1000 for a wide angle lens for DX camera is not ideal unless you are all about getting wider. If money isnt problem, go for the widest, or get tokina 11-16mm and nikon 17-55mm.