Lens quest...a possible gem??

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
I have said it before and I'll say it again (I'm sure everyone else has said it too:rolleyes:). Buy quality glass and 99% you get what you pay for. However, exceptions are always around. To my mind a nifty fifty tends to offer far more quality than its price would suggest . The Sigma 150mm has also brought me nothing but pleasure and quality images (when I use it correctly:facepalm:)

But what about this??? Sigma 18-50mm EX HSM f2.8:rolleyes:

I'm reading of good experiences with it... I would use it as my landscape glass. At just over £300 it seems a bargain?? Has anyone got this? Thoughts anyone?? I am seeking 2 more lenses... one in the 300mm range and a wide angle lens. Could this be the one or is it to be avoided.....

Pete:rolleyes:

EDIT: it does seem to suffer from CA/purple fringing, but then again so does lots of wider angle glass...
 
Last edited:

Pirate!!

Banned
I have said it before and I'll say it again (I'm sure everyone else has said it too:rolleyes:). Buy quality glass and 99% you get what you pay for. However, exceptions are always around. To my mind a nifty fifty tends to offer far more quality than its price would suggest . The Sigma 150mm has also brought me nothing but pleasure and quality images (when I use it correctly:facepalm:)

But what about this??? Sigma 18-50mm EX HSM f2.8:rolleyes:

I'm reading of good experiences with it... I would use it as my landscape glass. At just over £300 it seems a bargain?? Has anyone got this? Thoughts anyone?? I am seeking 2 more lenses... one in the 300mm range and a wide angle lens. Could this be the one or is it to be avoided.....

Pete:rolleyes:

EDIT: it does seem to suffer from CA/purple fringing, but then again so does lots of wider angle glass...
Hi Pete,

Firstly, I would suggest you look at either of the following:

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC*
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 OS DC

As for 300mm, are looking for a zoom, prime, constant aperture or variable aperture? What's the budget for the tele?

Always check prices with OneStop-Digital first. Warehouse Express are doing a crazy price for the Sigma AF 100-300mm F4 EX DF (IF) APO @ £809.00. TopCashback are doing up to 3% rebate if you click via them (sign-up for a free account).

I have the Sigma 17-70mm DC* Please see my image links for samples. The newer OS is lens stabilised and meant to be very good as well.
 
Last edited:

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
Hi Pete,

Firstly, I would suggest you look at either of the following:

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC*
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 OS DC

As for 300mm, are looking for a zoom, prime, constant aperture or variable aperture? What's the budget for the tele?

Always check prices with OneStop-Digital first. Warehouse Express are doing a crazy price for the Sigma AF 100-300mm F4 EX DF (IF) APO @ £809.00. TopCashback are doing up to 3% rebate if you click via them (sign-up for a free account).

I have the Sigma 17-70mm DC* Please see my image links for samples. The newer OS is lens stabilised and meant to be very good as well.
Cheers Pirate:smashin:

I can get hold of a used Sigma 100-300mm at £420. Great value but the lens is not as good as the Nikon 300mm F4.0. IQ is VERY important to me as I am a fussy pants and can't help it:laugh:

I'll check out the 'wide zoom suggestions... thank you for those. Something around 17-20mm is fine for me.... bearing in mind my nearest lens is a 50mm. I have been patiently watching ebay but would consider new too. I really want something for nothing (like we all do) but I know that's a rare thing which is why I asked about what appears to be a very good 18-50mm.

Pete:thumbsup:
 
Last edited:

denno75uk

Well-known Member
I did a fair amount of research before buying my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and of course the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 featured highly. In the end, after weighing up alot of reviews and forum(s) testimonies, I plumped for the Tamron. There's very rarely anything negative said about it. I've been absolutely beyond satisfied with my decision. It's a superb lens.
Of course, it's not without its issues. The AF motor isn't as refined as some, but then again it's also never failed me. I also read about the curved focal plane at wide angles, but I've never noticed it being a problem in real world useage.
I'd admit that with the EX construction and HSM motor, the Sigma seems to be the more 'pro' type lens, but don't write off the Tamron. The sharpness of the optics are an absolute joy.
 

senu

Distinguished Member
...I plumped for the Tamron. There's very rarely anything negative said about it. I've been absolutely beyond satisfied with my decision. It's a superb lens.
Of course, it's not without its issues. The AF motor isn't as refined as some, but then again it's also never failed me.

I'd admit that with the EX construction and HSM motor, the Sigma seems to be the more 'pro' type lens, but don't write off the Tamron. The sharpness of the optics are an absolute joy.
:smashin:+1
And Ive used Canon 17-55 USM IS f2.8 which is ace but the Tamron at 1/2 its cost really gives a good account of itself very well

Im Sure the Sigma is fine but try not to be tempted to write off the Tamron
 
Last edited:

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
Mmmmmmmmmmmm....... Thanks guys... food for thought there. I'll look into it. I am completely unbiased and had simply 'stumbled' across the Sigma reviews and went digging from there. The Tamron sounds impressive too!
 

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
Anyone using Tokina??

Looking at 12-24mm F4 and 11-16mm F2.8....

Never really considered Tokina before. Many of these lenses seem very highly rated for their Japanese build quality..... yes folks I'm on the lens warpath...again:facepalm:

Pete:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

TomQH

Novice Member
Anyone using Tokina??

Looking at 12-24mm F4 and 11-16mm F2.8....

Never really considered Tokina before. Many lenses seem very highly rated for their Japanese build quality..... yes folks I'm on the lens warpath...again:facepalm:

Pete:rolleyes:
From what you said above, sounds like you want ultrawide shots rather than just 'wide + general zoom'. Ultrawide is a lot of fun. I used to think it was just for big landscape shots, but have found that I can get those shots even at 70mm. Ultrawide for me is really fun for perspective shots, and shots where you can't step further back. In this case, 17 isn't wide enough. I find that I use 10mm 95% time on my 10-22.

I went for 10-22mm over 11-16 purely because I didn't want hassle with finding a 'good copy' of the tokina, which seemed to be less common than on the canon. From what I've read, you will be blown away by either. Personally, I've not been blown away by UWA yet, but that's maybe just my style - I prefer people shots.

Tom
 

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
Wide or ultra wide... I'm just speculating at the moment Tom. I am really looking for the 'hidden gem' in terms of IQ etc for the money. I am considering anything in and around the 11 to 24mm range at the wide end ... zoom or prime. The research takes me ages usually and I'll only take a chance if I see a 'steal' of a price second hand.

Pete:)
 

TomQH

Novice Member
Wide or ultra wide... I'm just speculating at the moment Tom. I am really looking for the 'hidden gem' in terms of IQ etc for the money. I am considering anything in and around the 11 to 24mm range at the wide end ... zoom or prime. The research takes me ages usually and I'll only take a chance if I see a 'steal' of a price second hand.

Pete:)
If you're looking for a bargain, I don't think Tokina 11-16mm will be easy. It's one of the less commonly available lenses, and snapped up pretty quickly. The range also almost makes it a prime (but then again so does the IQ).

I do think that you need to decide on UWA or Wide general zoom first though, before you go crazy with the choices!
 

senu

Distinguished Member
The Tokina 12-24 is fine but for those who really need 10mm, 12 may be a tad long
However , much as I like it , I dont use it as often as the Normal" Wide angle zoom,
(17-50 ) 50mm and 70-300 range lenses
 

Strobe

Well-known Member
I have the Tokina 12-24 and it's my favourite lens for landscape. Gets you thinking about composition much more (particularly things like foreground interest). I also considered the 11-16 Tokina but it was just out of my price range and the extra 8mm at the long end of the 12-24 is more useful than the 1mm at the wide end of the 11-16. I also wasn't fussed by the F2.8 of the 11-16 as 90% of my photography with this lens involves narrow apertures.

IMO, I wouldn't be overfussed about overlap with existing lenses if you are going for an UWA. If I am on a landscape shoot, I would take just my12-24, my tripod and my filters. The other lenses would stay at home, horses for courses. UWA are fun lenses but have limited use.
 
Last edited:

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
Thanks for the responses guys...

Bearing in mind I currently own 2 lenses, my Sigma 150mm macro and my 50mm prime, I am a little lacking in the wide and telephoto departments.

The Tokina 12-24mm is now on my contenders list as are a few others mentioned in the thread. I may end up with anything from the 11-16mm Tokina all the way through to a 17 or 18-50mm jobby from Tamron and Sigma.

Early days... the hunt is on:devil:
 

shotokan101

Distinguished Member
I am certainly beginning to see the attraction of a UWA lens - was taking some shots at the weeeknd of a Church extreior and just wanted that little bit more angle on some shots that my sigma 17-70 :( - still love the lens though but it just never stops does it :laugh:

Jim
 

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
I am certainly beginning to see the attraction of a UWA lens - was taking some shots at the weeeknd of a Church extreior and just wanted that little bit more angle on some shots that my sigma 17-70 :( - still love the lens though but it just never stops does it :laugh:

Jim
I know:rolleyes: You should see the special 'looks' my missus gives me when I mention tog kit....

...she knows it's not cheap:rolleyes:
 

Strobe

Well-known Member
WOW look here Tokina 12-24mm

Tokina 12-24mm f/4 II AT-X124 AF PRO DX Lens

A very low price. I've seen it priced over £500 in some places:rolleyes:

Mmmmmmm I'll sleep on it.
That's where I got mine from, but it's gone up since I got mine!! :D
Don't forget that OSD are Hong Kong based though, so no Nikon Warranty. From memory, OSD have their own 6 months warranty but lens would have to go back to Hong Kong if there are any issues. Tokina are usually pretty good quality-wise (unlike Sigma's where there seems to be more batch variance). If there are any minor front/back focussing issues you can sort that out with your D300s (mine was fine btw).
 

Richard King

Standard Member
what camera is it being used on - full frame or 3/4 ?
The newer Sigmas are OK, but in terms of total image quality they dont really touch the equivelent Nikon or Canon lenses
 

shotokan101

Distinguished Member
what camera is it being used on - full frame or 3/4 ?
The newer Sigmas are OK, but in terms of total image quality they dont really touch the equivelent Nikon or Canon lenses
What lenses are you comparing them to then ? :confused:

Jim
 

Richard King

Standard Member
say the Nikon 17 - 55

Advantages - focuses a lot quicker, better bokeh, and build quality is much better
Disadvantage - price tag
 

shotokan101

Distinguished Member
say the Nikon 17 - 55

Advantages - focuses a lot quicker, better bokeh, and build quality is much better
Disadvantage - price tag
Thanks but surely that's comparing a Pro Lens with Consumer models ?

Jim
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
Hi,

I shoot with both the Tamron 17-50 and the Tokina 12-24 and would say that they're both excellent lenses. The tamron spends most of it's life on my 40D as my walkabout lens and it's never failed me. In fact, most of my Flickr photostream has been shot with it and it's been ideal whether in a studio or in the middle of a stream shooting landscapes! I've shot with a borrowed Canon 24-70L and although the results from the Canon were slightly 'crisper' and the colours a bit 'richer', by cost comparison it wasn't a million miles away. :)

I bought the Tokina at the end of last year from this forum as I'd been looking for an ultra-wide for ages, specifically the Sigma 10-20 as I'd already used one on my 40D. However, after using an older EF fit Tokina 28-70 I went for the Tokina because it's built like a tank! Unfortunately, I haven't had much chance to use it this year due to a new baby keeping me indoors (so using the Tamron!) but this set was taken using the Tokina;

West Kirby - a set on Flickr

With regards to the Tamron/Sigma question, I looked at reviews for both and even though there's not much in it, I chose the Tamron due it's better CA control and supposedly faster AF. I bought the Tamron from OneStop-Digital and found them excellent to deal with.

Cheers
Steve
 

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
say the Nikon 17 - 55

Advantages - focuses a lot quicker, better bokeh, and build quality is much better
Disadvantage - price tag
Cheers Richard. The Nikon is a great lens but the price and performance are perhaps misaligned? Unlike the Tokina 12-24 and 11-16 which are also great lenses and can be used professionally at less money.

I am a fussy sort with lenses and would not be considering going outside Nikon unless the quality was available.

Pete.
 

Richard King

Standard Member
Cheers Richard. The Nikon is a great lens but the price and performance are perhaps misaligned? Unlike the Tokina 12-24 and 11-16 which are also great lenses and can be used professionally at less money.

I am a fussy sort with lenses and would not be considering going outside Nikon unless the quality was available.

Pete.
Yes of course you are both right. You need to choose both for your pocket and shooting need. you are of course balancing quality with money. If money is no object buy the Nikon. If you need the best quality, buy the Nikon. If you need the super fast focussing, buy the Nikon. If you dont need any of the above, and the difference in quality isnt worth the money for you, dont buy the Nikon. There is no right answer here - often with all things, there is the law of diminishing returns, and buying lenses is certainly a good way of spending a lot of needless money quickly
 

Pete Delaney

Well-known Member
Yes of course you are both right. You need to choose both for your pocket and shooting need. you are of course balancing quality with money. If money is no object buy the Nikon. If you need the best quality, buy the Nikon. If you need the super fast focussing, buy the Nikon. If you dont need any of the above, and the difference in quality isnt worth the money for you, dont buy the Nikon. There is no right answer here - often with all things, there is the law of diminishing returns, and buying lenses is certainly a good way of spending a lot of needless money quickly
You're not wrong Richard! If I could turn back the clock armed with my experiences I would have chosen my lenses very differently... and camera brand for that matter! But no I started with a Canon... went to Olympus and finished with Nikon. All that involved buying and selling lenses.

I should have stuck with Canon at the start and dedicated my investment in the glass. It's not that I don't care for Nikon, because I do.... it's just all the money it has cost to get here...all unnecessarily:(

Now that I half know what I'm talking about I know I shall stick with Nikon and buy quality glass. Fortunately for me the Tokina offerings appeal to me equally as much as some of the Nikon glass as build quality on the pro wide angles is very highly rated and IQ is marvelous on both.

Thanks for your inputs:smashin:

Pete:)
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: CES 2021 Special - Sony, LG, Panasonic, Samsung, TCL and Hisense TV news and more...

Latest News

Sky seals Studiocanal movie deal
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
iFi Audio launches iDSD Diablo DAC/Headphone amp
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung launches Galaxy Buds Pro
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung launches Galaxy S21, S21+ and S21 Ultra smart phones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Mola Mola debuts Kula integrated amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom