Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

which wide angle zoom should I get?


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 JohnA

JohnA

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sf bay area

Posted 21 October 2012 - 01:09 PM

I presently have a Nikon 10.5 on a D80 and Aquatica housing but think I'd like a wide zoom instead sometimes. I'm considering the Tokina 10-17, as well as the Nikon 10-24, and Nikon 12-24. I want something that will serve me well when I upgrade my body and housing in the future. I would be greatfull for any advice or opinions on these or something else I might want to considder as well.
I also have a Sigma 17-70, and a Nikon 60 micro for other situations. I generally use 2 strobes
Thanks- John

#2 KirkD

KirkD

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 October 2012 - 04:31 PM

I would go with the Tokina 10-17. Now all 3 lenses you have listed are DX lenses. I assume you would upgrade to another DX system.

Kirk

#3 ChrigelKarrer

ChrigelKarrer

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 637 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Playa Herradura-Costa Rica and Sardinia-Italy

Posted 21 October 2012 - 11:05 PM

I used sucessful the Tokina 12-24 mm rectiliear wide angle on my D90 and D7000, but this lens need a big dome - or special - dome
to get sharp corners. This lens is a DX lens, so you can't use it on a FX camera in FX mode but she works very good on a DX camera
and this lens is very useful for topside shooting as well as she don't distort the picture.
Chris

Nikon D800 - Sigma 15mm - Nikon 105mm Micro VR - Hugyfot Housing - 3 Inon Z-240 strobes - 2x2 8'' ULCS arms

Canon G12 with Patima aluminium housing - Fuji E900 with Ikelite housing
Visit My Costa Rica Website - Visit My Italy Website


#4 JohnA

JohnA

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sf bay area

Posted 22 October 2012 - 03:18 PM

Thank you both for the input. Hadn't thought too much about what I might upgrade to other then something with a bigger screen and autofocus video. Probably won't do that till 2014 or so. I use an 8" dome presently. Is there much diference in the image quality between the 10-17, and the 12-24 Tokina's? Kind of think that since I have the 10.5 prime lens, that the extra range of the 12-24 might be more usefull although the 10-17 seems to be really popular. Is there a lens that would serve me well presently, and still be a good one to have if I did wind up getting an fx camera? sort of thought I'd end up getting a d7000 or whatever replaces it by then, but figured I look into my next set up more when the time comes. Sounds like the the Nikon brand lensees aren't necessarilly any better, or am I reading too much into this?
Thanks Again - John

#5 KirkD

KirkD

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 October 2012 - 06:20 PM

Soft corners with tge 12-24, I use a +3 diopter with it and that helps. Having said that, I have both the Tokina 10-17 and 12-24. I use the 10-17 95% of the tine.
Kirk

#6 KirkD

KirkD

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 October 2012 - 06:23 PM

And I use the 8 inch dome port and the +3 diopter was Jean with aquatica'a suggestion since I use their housing.

#7 AndyBarker

AndyBarker

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bury St Edmunds Suffolk UK
  • Interests:Diving , Photography , Fishing ,

Posted 23 October 2012 - 10:36 AM

Hi
i use the Nikon12/24 W/A lens with wide dome port which approx 140mm , with a 35mm extender & a +4 diopter.
i get very sharp corners. i also have 10/17Fe & 10.5Fe both very good I would say the 10.5 Nikon is slightly sharper.
i think all lens have their place when to use them.

Regards,
Andy

Andy Barker
D800, Seacam,S45, Nikon 60mm micro, Nikon VR 105mm micro, Nikon 16x35mm, Nikon 16mm, fe, Seaflash 150ttl & Seacam flash arms


#8 JohnA

JohnA

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sf bay area

Posted 25 October 2012 - 04:04 AM

Sounds like the nikon 12-24 might be better then the tokina 12-24 in the corners, however the tok 10-17 seems to be a solid performer in most everyones tool box. Sort of makes sense in that I'd think it would be easier to get good optics in a range of 7 rather then 12. Havent tried a diopter yet. I know there's a depth of field loss, however in wide I'd think it more manageable. I could certainly use it sometimes with my 60 as well. I like my 10.5, but in a close situation with lots of divers a zoom could be handy to have I've found.
I too am very happy with the suppourt I've gotten from Aquatica. Basd on that alone I plan on sticking with them when I do upgrade.
Thanks- John

#9 Aussiebyron

Aussiebyron

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 595 posts

Posted 25 October 2012 - 06:05 PM

I have used both the 10.5mm Nikkor FE and the Tokina 10-17mm. I mainly shoot the Tokina at 10mm and prefer it over the 10.5mm as it feels less distorted and a fraction narrower in its field of view (Tokina @ 10mm vs Nikkor 10.5mm). The Tokina is more verstaile lens as it can used very successfully with shooting video on a DSLR and also CFWA stills with a TC and mini dome combo. You often find those that have the 10.5mm and the Tokina 10-17mm sell off their 10.5mm due to lack use.

But if your after a rectangular wide angle zoom lens and and excellent topside WA lens there is also the Tokinas 11-16mm.

Regards Mark
Nikon D7000 with Aquatica housing called "Deedee", Tokina 10-17,Nikkor 60mm, Nikkor 105mm, Sigma 17-70, Ikelite DS161

http://www.flickr.co...s/22898788@N04/

#10 JohnA

JohnA

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sf bay area

Posted 25 October 2012 - 07:40 PM

Wow!. That's a pretty compelling review. Topside I often seem to use a high end point and shoot.
I very much apreciate everyones input. It's really helped me sort through some of this. I've had some good results with my 10.5, but sounds like there won't be a sacrafice with the 10-17. That's reassureing.
Thanks Again - John

#11 tdpriest

tdpriest

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Solihull, UK
  • Interests:Diving medicine, warm water, scenery...

Posted 26 October 2012 - 05:48 AM

I've had some good results with my 10.5, but sounds like there won't be a sacrafice with the 10-17.


You will sacrifice a little optical quality for flexibility in use, but almost no-one seems to regret this.

#12 JohnA

JohnA

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sf bay area

Posted 27 October 2012 - 02:21 PM

I see there are a couple of choices in that lens. Am I correct in assuming that the AT-X 107 NH Fisheye 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5
is a better choice when compared to the 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 AT-X 107 AF DX

for my present body as well as a future upgrade?
Thanks- John