Which wide angle to borrow

[mateoc15]

I'm considering renting a wide angle lens for my trip out west. I have played with the Nikon 10.5mm and really love it, but it's not available from this site. I want something really wide with great quality for probably the 10 day period. Any suggestions? The first two (Sigma and Tamron) both look pretty good, but not sure why the Tamron f/3.5 with greater range is less expensive than the Sigma f/4.

Any input appreciated! Thanks!

Rent Wide Angle lenses for Nikon Digital Cameras

[OsmosisStudios]

Stick to the first 2 rows on that page.

I'd say, in order:
Nikon 10-24
Tokina 11-16
Sigma 10-20
Nikon 12-24.

I put the Nikon 12-24 at the bottom purely for range: 12mm isnt that wide anymore.

[mateoc15]

I must have just missed it before, I think because it's not currently available, but is reservable for when I need it. The Nikon 10.5 is available for $55 for 10 days. I've used this one before and I like it. What do you think about that? Where would you put it in your top 5 list?

[inkista]

Different list. The 10.5 is a fisheye--the lenses Os listed are rectilinear ultrawides. Very very different in terms of distortion and coverage. If you like the fisheye, get the fisheye. The other alternative would be the Sigma 10mm f/2.8.

Of course, there's always the Sigma 8-16.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by mateoc15

I must have just missed it before, I think because it's not currently available, but is reservable for when I need it. The Nikon 10.5 is available for $55 for 10 days. I've used this one before and I like it. What do you think about that? Where would you put it in your top 5 list?

I rented the 10.5 for a week when I went down south. It worked because I knew how to handle it and get specific effects, and I had fun. I'll be honest: I spent most of the time giggling with my face up to the viewfinder. That being said, I wouldnt borrow one again, and bought the Nikon 10-24. I wanted wide, but I didn't want funhouse.

That being said, a friend of mine shoots "fun-style" weddings and has purchased the 10.5 and uses it extensively, and it never looks tacky. She does wonders with it. So to each their own.

As far as Im concerned, if you want something USEFUL for a trip, get the 10-24. If you want bonkers-silly, get the 10.5 If you're feeling rich, get both.

[mateoc15]

Excellent reply Osmosis. This is what I'm looking for. So with the 10-24 can I get the fisheye effect at 10mm and the regular rectilinear wide angle shot at 12mm+? I like the fisheye at times, but I've really never played with anything around 12-15mm. I'll want to get many wide angle landscape shots out in the desert. That's what I really want.

I just checked out the 10-24 Nikon and it has 109 degree viewing angle at 10mm - quite a bit different than the 180 degree 10.5mm. Will 109 also be good enough to get what I'm looking for here?

The other thing I'm fighting is if I really want to mess with "un-fisheyeing" 10.5 fisheye shots. I used some really good software to do that a few times but the image does get a little screwy on the edges. See this versus this.

Thanks!

EDIT: The software I'm referring to is DXO Optics Pro v6.

[mateoc15]

And this group at Flickr.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by mateoc15

Excellent reply Osmosis. This is what I'm looking for. So with the 10-24 can I get the fisheye effect at 10mm and the regular rectilinear wide angle shot at 12mm+?

No, it's always rectilinear. You'll get SOME distortion, but it's in the 2-3%, not the 25+% of the fisheye. Its the kind of distortion that is BAD, not FUN.

Originally Posted by mateoc15

I just checked out the 10-24 Nikon and it has 109 degree viewing angle at 10mm - quite a bit different than the 180 degree 10.5mm. Will 109 also be good enough to get what I'm looking for here?

It's different, yes, but the 180 degrees is exaggerated from the fisheye distortion. The two are VERY different lenses and each has their uses. Honestly, the point of a fisheye isnt as much the angle of view (180 degrees) as it is the distortion. A UWA lens like the 10-24 will give you a VERY wide angle of view but keep things normal.

Originally Posted by mateoc15

The other thing I'm fighting is if I really want to mess with "un-fisheyeing" 10.5 fisheye shots. I used some really good software to do that a few times but the image does get a little screwy on the edges. See this versus this.
.

You *can* de-fish images, but you'll lose some image quality, and some of the image as well. It's generally not worth it. I'd VASTLY prefer a 10-24 to a 10.5 and de-fishing.

The other thing to consider is the particular optical qualities of each lens. The 10.5, for instance, has what I affectionately refer to as a "butt-load" or chromatic abberations, the likes of which are actually hard to remove even with a great RAW processor. That alone sealed the deal for me.

[mateoc15]

I think I'll rent the Nikon 10-24 but I'm seriously considering just buying the Tokina 12-24. It has lots of great reviews (Ken Rockwell, B&H users, others) and only $399. I can rent for 10 days or just pay 4x to buy one. If I don't like it I can always return it right?

[OsmosisStudios]

I have an aversion to off-brand Lenses (call me OCD, i guess). If you're gonna go off-brand, though, I'd go for the Sigma 10-20 (the old one, if you can still find them) or a Tokina 11-16.