Wide angle dilemma!

[Jimm]

New to this site, first post. I have recently purchased a Nikon d7000 with the 28-105 lens. I would like some opinions as to whether I need a ultra wide angle or not and if so Nikon 10-24 or Sigma 10-20 for $180.00 less. I don't have any one area of photography that I especially want to concentrate on but other than the ocassional family shot I am not interested in portraits but more outdoors and scenic shots. Thanks for your help.

[zona5101]

Hi and welcome.
Why not shoot for a while with the lens you have and see how many times you wish you could get wider...that would be the best indicator of you should pursue a wider lens.

[Fraucha]

zona is correct

But if you decide to go wide take a very hard look at the Tokina 11-16:
Tokina Lens Review | Tokina Lens | Lens Reviews
Tokina 11-16mm

I have been hard pressed to find anything negative about this glass. It won't break the bank either.

[Jimm]

Thanks for the advice. I will check out the Tokina.

[Aegea]

The Tokina 12-24 is also very good, and is a better match range-wise for the 28-105, though not as wide as the other alternatives mentioned. BTW, congrats on the 28-105, it's an excellent and often underrated lens.

[super-human]

Originally Posted by Jimm

New to this site, first post. I have recently purchased a Nikon d7000 with the 28-105 lens. I would like some opinions as to whether I need a ultra wide angle or not and if so Nikon 10-24 or Sigma 10-20 for $180.00 less. I don't have any one area of photography that I especially want to concentrate on but other than the ocassional family shot I am not interested in portraits but more outdoors and scenic shots. Thanks for your help.

I was in same situation when i bought my camera. I did a lot of research before i bought sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 and i found that was best value for money at the time and produce great results. very happy with the purchase and can't complain the results.

[ravncat]

I have the Tokina 11-16 It`s a brilliant lens, but it covers a very small range and you`d want to stop it down a bit for most lanscapes. The Sigma / Nikon / Tokina 10-20/ 10/12-24 lenses are more versatile and probably a bit better for landscape.

I agree with what others have said above. You might not need an Ultra-wide angle right away - and getting the right lens saves alot of money. I would definitely use what you have for awhile (I`m not sure how long you`ve had it) before getting an ultrawide. I`m not saying don`t get one, but make sure you know you need it before you get it - Ultrawides are essential for some and useless for others. After awhile you`ll get to know where your limits are and what will let you extend those limits. Renting lenses before getting them can be very very useful. It`s easy to fall into a "gotta catch em all" trap

[Jimm]

Thanks to all for the help and advice. Guess I'll wait a bit but have good suggestions when and if the time comes.

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by Fraucha

zona is correct

But if you decide to go wide take a very hard look at the Tokina 11-16:
Tokina Lens Review | Tokina Lens | Lens Reviews
Tokina 11-16mm

I have been hard pressed to find anything negative about this glass. It won't break the bank either.

I have it too John, a very good lens, and a fast constant f/2.8 is a bonus

[dakwegmo]

28mm on a crop sensor body definitely wouldn't be wide enough for my landscape work; most of my shots are in the 18-24 range. I have the Tokina 12-24, but rarely use it zoomed out to 12mm though.

That said, I completely agree with zona here. If you want to make the most of your gear purchases, use what you have, learn its limitations, then figure out whether you need more practice or different/additional gear to overcome those limitations. You're less likely to buy stuff you don't really need that way.