Sigma or Tokina Wide Angle

[BLBJBranch]

Folks,
Need some advice on a new lens. Can anyone directly compare the Sigma 8-16mm and the Tokina 11-16mm?

I've read reviews on them online and have almost been convinced to go with the Tokina, but I don't know if I'll miss the extra 3mm.

I plan to use it for landscapes, interesting up-close shots to bring in the viewer, and inside shots of cathedrals and other buildings.

For the inside shots, I'm thinking the 2.8 capability of the Tokina will be useful, but having a DX format D-90, I figure I may need the 8mm capability to get extra width.

I think I'd also like to have the capability to put a protective UV filter on the Tokina, too.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

[timlaug]

Get the Tokina it is an awesome lense

[BLBJBranch]

Also, is the Nikon 10-24 worth the extra money? I prefer Nikon lenses, but there's currently a $300 difference in price between it and the Tokina. I have the 18-105 Nikkor, so I don't think I really need the extra zoom capability.

[autofocus]

Have, and love the Tokina. It's tack sharp and produces beautiful colors. Here's an example shot with it. Obviously, the photo has been played with in PS, but it'll give you the idea. Shot at 11mm at f/8

Comet Caliento by vmontalbano, on Flickr

[Jo.T]

Have you looked at the 10 - 20 mm sigma just to confuse you a bit more . I got the f3.5 very happy with it on my D90. i will admit i did a lot of research and found just about all of the wide angle lenses seem to get very good review. I went with the 10-20mm after few recomendations from friends at camera club that have it. One thing to remember a wide angle is very different to work with so dont worry if it crosses over with your 18 - 105mm.

[sk66]

If I were buying for a crop body I would have to consider the Sigma 8-16mm, but it won't accept filters natively (there ARE ways though). After that it would be a toss-up between the Sigma 10-20 and the Tokina 11-16 w/ the Tokina being a little better in critical testing. I personally don't think the Nikon is worth the extra money in this group.

[BLBJBranch]

Thanks for all the responses so far. One last question, I hope:

Will the bulging lens of the sigma 11-16 make it more susceptible to lens flare than Tokina or the Sigma 10-20?

Thanks.

[KenRC51]

To me all Nikon lens are worth the extra money. I owned a Tamron 17-55 2.8 and was really happy with it until I used the Nikon 24-70, wow, what a difference. It like day and night.

For those who don't want to spend as much on a lens or can't afford it at the moment, I would say Sigma make some darn good lens. Most of their lens have the HSM motor so it focus really quick almost as quick at the Nikon. Also, the Sigma takes really crisp and sharp photos for the money.

I don't like Tonika because it feels like I'm holding a plastic fragile lens in my hands. I personally have not used the Tonika but for those who I spoke to have said that they love.

My suggestion is to rent the lens or find a friend who has one to borrow it.

[autofocus]

I don't like Tonika because it feels like I'm holding a plastic fragile lens in my hands. I personally have not used the Tonika but for those who I spoke to have said that they love.

Think you got this one wrong, see below from Ken Rockwell test data

Tokina's AT-X lenses are tough. Unlike the dinky Tamrons and dumpy Sigmas, Tokina's lenses feel like real lenses. They feel even tougher and seem to have more metal and meat than the Nikon 12-24mm.

Another comment from the review:
The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X is the best ultrawide zoom available for Nikon DX cameras, better than even Nikon's more expensive 12-24mm AF-S DX.

As I stated above, I own this lens, and I assure you, it's built like a tank

[sk66]

Originally Posted by BLBJBranch

Thanks for all the responses so far. One last question, I hope:

Will the bulging lens of the sigma 11-16 make it more susceptible to lens flare than Tokina or the Sigma 10-20?

Thanks.

I think you meant the Sigma 8-16mm and the answer is "probably". That and the lack of filters (natively) is pretty large....still, 8mm is a large difference from 11mm.

Honestly, I had the Sigma 10-20 and was quite happy. The Tokina rates better but I've never used one.