I am looking to buy a wide angle lens and would like your input. Something to use with a D3100/D5100/D7000. The two that got my attention the most are the Sigma 8-16mm(4.5-5.6F) and the Tokina 11-16mm(2.8F). Any of you used either one, will I have too much image distortion from the 8mm?
I need a wide angle lens, any suggestions?
- Thread starter Ken1212
- Start date
pulpfiction007
Veteran
The Tokina's are great lenses... and that aperture sounds like a nice plus. I used the 12-24 for Canon and loved it.
Throwback
Well-known member
I have the 8-16mm Sigma lens having previously bought a sharp copy of the full-frame equivalent Sigma 12-24mm lens (which, incidentally was an excellent lens that I found held up well to the Nikon for architectural stills work, when stopped down to f8) and think in many ways that it is a better lens (in fact, I've now sold the Sigma 12-24mm): aside from the obvious (and fantastic!) width for DX cameras, the 8-16mm is sharp throughout the range even wide open, whereas the Sigma 12-24 was soft towards the longer end of the range, and is better in terms of colour and exposure (the 12-24mm underexposed around 2/3 of a stop), and there is much less flare. There is more barrel distortion at 8mm than the full-frame lens at 12mm, which would be noticeable for video (i.e. without PTlens or similar being an option) if filming something with strong, clearly defined verticals at the edges of the frame, but zooming in slightly (e.g. to 11-12mm) gets rid of this. A great lens and, incidentally, it's far smoother at focusing than any of my Nikon lenses, which is good for video use: as with any Sigma, it may be worth checking out a few copies in a shop before buying, though - unlike previous experience with the 12-24 - I found almost no difference between the different ones I tried this time. The only negative is that it's almost impossible to fit ND filters: I've tried to bodge something and have given up, not least because with such a wide lens shallow dof is hardly something to aim for, so you can stop right down for video (and diffraction is not a significant issue with small apertures at 1080p).
I seem to favor the 8mm, but I will mostly use it for video and recording people for indie films. If I am going to get a distorted image though at the 8 to 10mm range then I might go for the Tokina 11-16mm which will give me a 2.8f. Did you get to test any of the Tokina lenses, I wonder how they compare as far as sharpness and distortion.
Throwback
Well-known member
The distortion of the 8-16mm at its widest end is, as I say, relevant to things like architectural subjects, but hardly an issue for much else: more significant than this will be the inherent distorted view of any lens this wide (e.g. heads of people near the edge of the frame looking elongated horizontally), but this comes down to usage and style, not lens performance. I mostly use the lens at 8mm, and there is - at the moment - nothing else to touch it. In terms of barrel distortion, I have not owned the Tokina simply for the fact that the barrel distortion at 11mm is significant: as I said the Sigma 12-24mm had neglible distorion at 12mm, and the 8-16mm, while having some barrel distorion at its widest, is much better in terms of distortion control by the time it reaches the Tokina's range. In terms of sharpness, look at the Photozone reviews of both if you want to see intelligble lab type analysis (which, from my experience of using wide-angle lenses more than any other type, are borne out by real-world usage): the Sigma 8-16 is sharper at its widest, but the Tokina is good, and both will easily outresolve 1080p, and will be fine for stills usage. More of a concern to me would be the Tokina's lateral chromatic aberrations, which are significant (and not so easily corrected with video), whereas the Sigma is remarkable in this regard. Overall, tho', I'd say the main advantages of the Sigma 8-16 are much greater angle of view (the difference between 8 and 11mm is huge), and better control of distortion by 11mm; the advantages of the Tokina 11-16 are wider aperture and the fact you can fit filters (77mm). Only you can balance the these, but I'd recommend trying both out in a shop if you can.
triangular
New member
Well I would strongly recommend the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8. Here's why:
If I'm shooting stills then I probably don't need a 2.8 aperture, and neither will I be worried about my DoF, which I'd probably want to stay deep.
For video however its exactly opposite. Being stuck at slow shutter speeds (and especially when not shooting in direct sunlight), I want down to at least 2.8 on all my lenses. And possibly even more important than the exposure flexibility is the DoF. In video I might want to isolate the background even with such a wide angle. In video wide angles are more useful, and can still be used for medium or even close up shots. You probably don't want the typical landscape look with long DoF to all your wide video shots. And again, at 1/30th or 1/60th shutter, you really want as much room on the aperture as possible.
The other thing that I think makes the Tokina ideal is the big fat MF ring. Its soooo easy to use. Nice and wide, and well dampened for smooth use. It also has a unique focus-clutch system, which lets you easily change between AF and MF override without changing any of the camera settings. Plus the lens is built well, as well as any can be. It's a bit of a tank actually. And while you don't necessarily need a super sharp lens for video, optically nobody (not even Nikon) makes a sharper lens. It is really the best option for IQ in this focal range, at least for stills and probably for video to.
BTW I do have the Tokina and its a pleasure to use it.
If I'm shooting stills then I probably don't need a 2.8 aperture, and neither will I be worried about my DoF, which I'd probably want to stay deep.
For video however its exactly opposite. Being stuck at slow shutter speeds (and especially when not shooting in direct sunlight), I want down to at least 2.8 on all my lenses. And possibly even more important than the exposure flexibility is the DoF. In video I might want to isolate the background even with such a wide angle. In video wide angles are more useful, and can still be used for medium or even close up shots. You probably don't want the typical landscape look with long DoF to all your wide video shots. And again, at 1/30th or 1/60th shutter, you really want as much room on the aperture as possible.
The other thing that I think makes the Tokina ideal is the big fat MF ring. Its soooo easy to use. Nice and wide, and well dampened for smooth use. It also has a unique focus-clutch system, which lets you easily change between AF and MF override without changing any of the camera settings. Plus the lens is built well, as well as any can be. It's a bit of a tank actually. And while you don't necessarily need a super sharp lens for video, optically nobody (not even Nikon) makes a sharper lens. It is really the best option for IQ in this focal range, at least for stills and probably for video to.
BTW I do have the Tokina and its a pleasure to use it.