Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sorry if this has been done to death.

 

After reading loadsa stuff on here about lenses. I finally got the Nikon 60mm macro for my Nik D80 to start off with and seemed to be an easy enough choice and got great reviews from you guys.

 

I am now lokking for a WA lens but dont want the fisheye kind. So I was going to go for the Tokina 12-24mm WA. Something suuitable for fitting in those Manta's and Whale shaks, without having to back off to far to fit it all in the frame and loosing the colour and detail.

 

What do you think? good choice or not.

 

Thanx in advanced

 

Spen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use same camera with Nikon 12-24 and am very happy with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
post-1513-1181218996_thumb.jpgNikon 12-24 is a good lens. IMO you cannot beat Nikon optic quality, but I have to admit I have not used a Tokina lens. Here is a shot I took with the 12-24.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally just cannot get the sharpness I like underwater with the Nikon 12-24 trying different dioptres etc. I prefer the Nikon 16mm for sharpness if you do not want full fisheye on the D80. Right now I use mostly the Tokina 10-17 and the Nikon 17-55 (There is also a Tokina 16-50 in this range just released. It looks like a sweet lens and is probably worth a look). I think this could be a better range than 12-24 for the animals you describe, particularly if you are not always that close. I am very happy with all aspects of my kit from 10mm fisheye through 55mm, pretty much all I need underwater.

Edited by loftus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HI All,

I go with the Nikon 12/24 I find this a great lens, I have not used the Tokina so I

can not comment. I would suggest that you look at as many lens & check to see

that you can get a port to suit.

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HI All,

I go with the Nikon 12/24 I find this a great lens, I have not used the Tokina so I

can not comment. I would suggest that you look at as many lens & check to see

that you can get a port to suit.

Andy

 

 

Check out this review:

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wi.../comparison.htm

 

The Nikon comes out on top but just barely. For the money I would go with the Tokina. I have the Nikon--the Tokina wasn't available when I bought mine. It is a fine lens.

 

Personally I prefer the simplicity of the fixed focal length and now use the Sigma 15mm FE whenever I would have chosen the 12-24mm. I find it easier to focus as well with the f2.8. This is basically the same as the Nikon 16mm loftus recommends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used the Nikon and also the Tokina. The Tokina is much less $$$ and almost as good. It did show a little more CA than the Nikon.

 

Sincerely,

James Wiseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I used the Nikon and also the Tokina. The Tokina is much less $$$ and almost as good. It did show a little more CA than the Nikon.
I agree with that but would also add that the 12-24 is a contrasty lens and that is something I appreciate because you cannot gain the same kind of contrast in post. Color fidelity is excellent though this may be something others with other lenses can work in post anyway. But if a person cannot come up with the housing/port/extension combo to get results as sharp as the lens is capable of, I understand why they would not like it.

 

I use mine behind the Superdome with a 35mm (PVL35 in Seacam-speak) ext. ring, and find the lens really really great at pelagics and large fish studies. I prefer a prime for reef scenics and most CFWA, because to me they almost feel like landscapes so they have got to be as sharp as possible and for the lenses I have the primes do that better. But when shooting big fish the 12-24 is a nice tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iggy:

 

Which prime do you use?

 

Cheers

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which prime do you use?
Hi James, I'm sold on the 14 for rectilinear and the 10.5 for fe. I know, I run against the grain of this website in these selections, but the 14mm is one of the best pieces of glass Nikon has ever offered. It is every bit as competent as the 20mm f4 AI. It sucked on film because you just couldn't get a dome/ring combo that worked in the corners, but UW on DX it's a splendid lens. The 10.5 just works for me. To my eye it is visibly better than the tok 10-17mm at the wide end, so the fact that the tok zooms to 17 doesn't matter to me. If I were a working photographer then I think the zoom might have some impact on my choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still a fan of the sigma 10-20 for its 108 degree on nikon coverage and very close focus ability meaning you are less likely to need a diopter.

 

There is some discussion here and in post 6 you will find links to other discussion on wetpixel about the 10-20.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...