[r-man]

Any thoughts on lens choices appreciated, considering these are for a Nikon D90.

1. For a wide angle, which of these do people think is best:

Tokina 11-16 2.8f
Nikon 12-24 4f
Tokina 10-24 2.5-4.5f

2. For a standard zoom:

Tokina 16-50 2.8f
Tamron 17-50 2.8f
Sigma 17-50 2.8f

[dave]

I'd question whether you really need to be batting with two big zooms there. Seems overkill.

Out of the midrange zooms none of them would be persuading me to part with cash. The Tokina was the most promising but reviews seem to recon its a bit wack optically. The sigma might be alright but its a gamble. The Tamron is a Tamron. If you really must have one of these then I'd get one and forget about the wide zoom. 16mm/17mm is plenty wide enough, you could put the spare cash towards a fisheye or flash. Or go all the way with a nikon 17-35mm or 17-50mm - will be expensive but might be the only lens you ever need buy, whereas you're almost certain to want to upgrade from the tamron/sigma/tokina at some point.

Of the wide zooms the Tokina 11-16mm is the standout one, supposed to be well jackson. I've not heard of the other Tokina. The Nikon will be good too, although neither will be cheap. Personally I'd go with the Tokina 11-16, and get a fast prime in the 35-50mm range.

I team up my 10-20mm with a nikon 50mm or 35mm all the time, its a good versatile setup.

[Jim]

just get one of these
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/dx/af-s_dx_16-85mmf_35-56g_vr/index.htm

[dave]

Or just get a D3X, don't need a lens, just shoot through the bodycap.

[JamesD]

Any thoughts on lens choices appreciated, considering these are for a Nikon D90.

1. For a wide angle, which of these do people think is best:

Tokina 11-16 2.8f (owned and used) excellent lens.

Nikon 12-24 4f (owned and used)
Thought it was great....until I got the Tokina, predictable and easy to correct distortion but not sharp enough for my liking and suffers from abberation a little too easily for what it costs!

Tokina 10-24 2.5-4.5f

Budget lens, (I assume you mean the 12-24 btw?) don't bother if you are considering the other two, they are both better made and perform better.

2. For a standard zoom:

Tokina 16-50 2.8f Average
Tamron 17-50 2.8f Average
Sigma 17-50 2.8f Average

Dave hit the nail on the head with this one, primes still do it better unless you are prepared to spend a lot more on a zoom for this focal range, two primes will cost you about the same and give you far far far superior performance.
It costs a lot to make a zoom with that kind of focal range perform as well as a prime lens, which is why nikons pro-zooms cost circa £1000 plus, and yet you can buy primes for around half that price that match their performance, ask yourself if you really need a zoom, are you shooting events and you need the speed of focal length change without having to change lenses....or are you just thinking of convenience. If its the inconvenience, then trust me, the incredible image quality will far outweigh the minor hassle of having to change lens, plus since all of the decent primes were made to work well on 35mm film (or FF digital), they will still do you proud when you inevitably upgrade to FF digital as it becomes cheaper and cheaper, or if you fancy shooting some 35mm film.

[r-man]

Thanks for the great replies, lots of useful info.

ask yourself if you really need a zoom, are you shooting events and you need the speed of focal length change without having to change lenses....or are you just thinking of convenience. If its the inconvenience, then trust me, the incredible image quality will far outweigh the minor hassle of having to change lens

Hmm, primes were the other option, and I was going to ask which primes would be most useful, but didn't want to ask a million questions.

The thing I was concerned with about using primes for climbing, is the number of times the shot I've wanted has been from perched on a boulder, squeezed between tree branches, or with my back to a big drop. Was worried that with primes you need to move around to get the right composition, and often terrain might make it impossible to get the right shot. Any thoughts?

[dave]

Working with primes is different to working with a zoom, so its hard to say. At first you will probably think you're being limited. In the long run you'll learn the way of working though. instead of waiting for a shot to come to you and then looking to see if the lens you've got fits the shot, you'll instead learn to see stuff that the lens you've got suits, so that eventually most things that grab your eye will be workable with the lens you have. Zooming with your feet is generally better cos you control every aspect of the shot and background and perspective, instead of just staying put and zooming (essentially just cropping) in or out. Obviously in some cases you'll be stuck, but that's just something you live with - you'll get stuck with zooms too just in different ways, i.e. not fast enough, too heavy so you left it at home etc.

So basically if you leave the house with only a 35mm lens you'll either not see or ignore the shots that would need a telephoto or a wide lens. With zooms its easy to fall into the trap of assuming that there's only one right focal length for the scene in front of you.

Although it might seem restrictive at first its ultimately can give you more freedom cos it removes fucking around with a zoom ring as yet another source of distraction.

The great thing with primes if you can buy a second hand lens, use it for 6 months and if you genuinely don't get on with it flog it for the same money. Its a win-win.

[Paul B]

I've only got a kit lens and a 50mm prime and the latter is always on the body, it just knocks the socks off the kit lens.

[cofe]

Tokina 12-24 isn't a budget lens but it is very good and reasonably priced. Would be my choice for a wide without breaking the bank.

[dawid]

Any use for climbing of AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8
second hand 160 bobins and then get 50mm 1.4 and the item 11-16 tokina ?

Anybody from Sheffield going to FOCUS this weekend in Birmingham?
http://www.focus-on-imaging.co.uk/
Would that be a good place to get lenses cheap ? 
   
   

[Jim]

just get one of these
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/dx/af-s_dx_16-85mmf_35-56g_vr/index.htm

[dave]

Any use for climbing of AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 [/url]

I've got one from using film. On digital it is a mild wideangle. I use it on digital very rarely. Good lens if you want a mild wideangle.

[JamesD]

Wasn't sure where to put this and didn't think it was worthy of its own thread, but behold  pure Nikon Lens pr0n....

Sharper than the 14-24mm apparently 

I think i'm in love.


http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-nikon-16-35mm-f4-g-af-s-ed-vr-lens/p1519459

[dave]

It'll take a filter too, so you can sack your graphic designer.

[JamesD]

It'll take a filter too, so you can sack your graphic designer.

I know, all my gassing about how flipping great the 14-24mm is, and Nikon go and outdo themselves again!

Amazing