|
View:
New views
14 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
|
|
NOT for PanoramasGuys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens for NIKON
cameras but retilinear !!! What you guys suggest me among the Sigma 10-20 and Sigma 12-24 or the Nikon 12-24 ??? THANKS Cheers ------------ | A Y R | | T O N | ------------ + 55 21 9982 6313 http://ayrton360.com http://rio.360cities.net http://vrfolio.com http://ayrton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
|
Re: NOT for Panoramas--- In PanoToolsNG@..., AYRTON <avi@...> wrote:
> > Guys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens for NIKON > cameras > but retilinear !!! > > What you guys suggest me among the > Sigma 10-20 > and Sigma 12-24 > or the Nikon 12-24 ??? > Ayrton - I have a Tokina 12-24 that I use with my D300. I'm not overly impressed. I've compared it to the Nikon 12-24 that seems to be much sharper on the edges. I've read reviews that claim the Tokina is almost as good as the Nikon for half the price. That's what I went with, but I'm not so sure I got a lens that comes close to that positive review. Hoyle |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasI've compared all current lens in the 10-24mm range and the Nikon is
the best. Matt On 7 May 2008, at 17:11, AYRTON wrote: > Guys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens for > NIKON > cameras > but retilinear !!! > > What you guys suggest me among the > Sigma 10-20 > and Sigma 12-24 > or the Nikon 12-24 ??? > > THANKS > Cheers > > ------------ > | A Y R | > | T O N | > ------------ > > + 55 21 9982 6313 > > http://ayrton360.com > http://rio.360cities.net > http://vrfolio.com > http://ayrton.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
|
Re: NOT for Panoramas> I've compared all current lens in the 10-24mm range and the Nikon is
> the best. But best at what? The Nikon is excellent at 24mm, but can't beat the Sigma 10-20mm at 10mm if most of the uses will be at the short end. There is also the price tag and if a crop lens will do, it can save you quite some bucks. Note that the Sigma 12-24 is a FF, while the other two are for APS-C. You can also check out photozone.de, they have some nice reviews up there. Viele Grüße Jürgen |
|
|
Re: Re: NOT for PanoramasOn Wed, May 7, 2008 at 1:25 PM, hoylekoontz <hkoontz@...> wrote:
> --- In PanoToolsNG@..., AYRTON <avi@...> wrote: > > > > Guys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens for > NIKON > > cameras > > but retilinear !!! > > > > What you guys suggest me among the > > Sigma 10-20 > > and Sigma 12-24 > > or the Nikon 12-24 ??? > > > > Ayrton - I have a Tokina 12-24 that I use with my D300. I'm not > overly impressed. I've compared it to the Nikon 12-24 that seems to > be much sharper on the edges. I've read reviews that claim the Tokina > is almost as good as the Nikon for half the price. That's what I went > with, but I'm not so sure I got a lens that comes close to that > positive review. Thanks for the info Hoyle I appreciatte that. Cheers AYRTON > > > Hoyle > > > ------------------------------------ > > -- > > > > -- ------------ | A Y R | | T O N | ------------ + 55 21 9982 6313 http://ayrton360.com http://rio.360cities.net http://vrfolio.com http://ayrton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasOn Wed, May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Rogers <matthew@...>
wrote: > I've compared all current lens in the 10-24mm range and the Nikon is > the best. Yeahhh I tought so :-) But I mostly use the D300 so I was thinking if the extra money it is really "that" difference ... But THANKS for the info. Cheers AYRTON > > > Matt > > On 7 May 2008, at 17:11, AYRTON wrote: > > > Guys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens for > > NIKON > > cameras > > but retilinear !!! > > > > What you guys suggest me among the > > Sigma 10-20 > > and Sigma 12-24 > > or the Nikon 12-24 ??? > > > > THANKS > > Cheers > > > > ------------ > > | A Y R | > > | T O N | > > ------------ > > > > + 55 21 9982 6313 > > > > http://ayrton360.com > > http://rio.360cities.net > > http://vrfolio.com > > http://ayrton.com > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > ------------------------------------ > > -- > > > > -- ------------ | A Y R | | T O N | ------------ + 55 21 9982 6313 http://ayrton360.com http://rio.360cities.net http://vrfolio.com http://ayrton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasAnother note is the Sigma 12-24 can be used on full frame dslrs. I
use one on a Canon 5D. Very low CA and almost no barrel distortion. I don't love the lens but it has it's pluses. http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Sigma-12-24mm-f45-56-EX-DG Jook On May 7, 2008, at 4:06 PM, AYRTON wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Rogers > <matthew@...> > wrote: > > > I've compared all current lens in the 10-24mm range and the Nikon is > > the best. > > Yeahhh I tought so :-) > But I mostly use the D300 so I was thinking if the extra money it > is really > "that" difference ... > But THANKS for the info. > Cheers > AYRTON > > > > > > > Matt > > > > On 7 May 2008, at 17:11, AYRTON wrote: > > > > > Guys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens > for > > > NIKON > > > cameras > > > but retilinear !!! > > > > > > What you guys suggest me among the > > > Sigma 10-20 > > > and Sigma 12-24 > > > or the Nikon 12-24 ??? > > > > > > THANKS > > > Cheers > > > > > > ------------ > > > | A Y R | > > > | T O N | > > > ------------ > > > > > > + 55 21 9982 6313 > > > > > > http://ayrton360.com > > > http://rio.360cities.net > > > http://vrfolio.com > > > http://ayrton.com > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > -- > ------------ > | A Y R | > | T O N | > ------------ > > + 55 21 9982 6313 > > http://ayrton360.com > http://rio.360cities.net > http://vrfolio.com > http://ayrton.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > Jook Leung Photography 360VR Images - 360 degree Panoramic photography Web: http://360vr.com E-mail: jook@... Mobile: 201 679 6177 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasOn Thu, 08 May 2008 01:11:35 +0900, AYRTON <avi@...> wrote:
> Guys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens for NIKON > cameras > but retilinear !!! > > What you guys suggest me among the > Sigma 10-20 > and Sigma 12-24 > or the Nikon 12-24 ??? You might also like to consider the Tamron 11-18. The range is rather narrower than some, but is OK if you have the usual 18-70 (or whatever) to go with it for the wider stuff. I looked at all of these choices, although I must admit that although I like the image quality of the Nikon it was outside my price range. I was warned off the Sigma 10-20 by an apparently knowledgeable camera shop assistant, but I have no experience to back up his opinion. I like the colour rendition of this lens, and image quality is very good, although you can find chromatic aberration at the outer edges if you zoom in far enough. It's easily removed in RAW, though... Roger W. -- Work: www.adex-japan.com Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasYeah that's a good point to it ...Thanks Jook
Cheers AYRTON On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Jook Leung <jook360@...> wrote: > Another note is the Sigma 12-24 can be used on full frame dslrs. I > use one on a Canon 5D. Very low CA and almost no barrel distortion. I > don't love the lens but it has it's pluses. > > http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Sigma-12-24mm-f45-56-EX-DG > > Jook > > > > On May 7, 2008, at 4:06 PM, AYRTON wrote: > > > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Matthew Rogers > > <matthew@...> > > wrote: > > > > > I've compared all current lens in the 10-24mm range and the Nikon is > > > the best. > > > > Yeahhh I tought so :-) > > But I mostly use the D300 so I was thinking if the extra money it > > is really > > "that" difference ... > > But THANKS for the info. > > Cheers > > AYRTON > > > > > > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > On 7 May 2008, at 17:11, AYRTON wrote: > > > > > > > Guys this is kind of OT, butI need to buy a new wide angle lens > > for > > > > NIKON > > > > cameras > > > > but retilinear !!! > > > > > > > > What you guys suggest me among the > > > > Sigma 10-20 > > > > and Sigma 12-24 > > > > or the Nikon 12-24 ??? > > > > > > > > THANKS > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > ------------ > > > > | A Y R | > > > > | T O N | > > > > ------------ > > > > > > > > + 55 21 9982 6313 > > > > > > > > http://ayrton360.com > > > > http://rio.360cities.net > > > > http://vrfolio.com > > > > http://ayrton.com > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > ------------ > > | A Y R | > > | T O N | > > ------------ > > > > + 55 21 9982 6313 > > > > http://ayrton360.com > > http://rio.360cities.net > > http://vrfolio.com > > http://ayrton.com > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > Jook Leung Photography > 360VR Images - 360 degree Panoramic photography > Web: http://360vr.com > E-mail: jook@... > Mobile: 201 679 6177 > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > ------------------------------------ > > -- > > > > -- ------------ | A Y R | | T O N | ------------ + 55 21 9982 6313 http://ayrton360.com http://rio.360cities.net http://vrfolio.com http://ayrton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasOn Wed, May 7, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Roger D. Williams <roger@...>
wrote: > > You might also like to consider the Tamron 11-18. Thanks Roger Do you have one ??? And do you like it ? I can't find any reviews on that lens ... Cheers AYRTON > The range is rather > narrower than some, but is OK if you have the usual 18-70 (or whatever) > to go with it for the wider stuff. I looked at all of these choices, > although I must admit that although I like the image quality of the > Nikon it was outside my price range. I was warned off the Sigma 10-20 > by an apparently knowledgeable camera shop assistant, but I have no > experience to back up his opinion. > > I like the colour rendition of this lens, and image quality is very > good, although you can find chromatic aberration at the outer edges > if you zoom in far enough. It's easily removed in RAW, though... > > Roger W. > > -- > Work: www.adex-japan.com > Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger > > ------------------------------------ > > -- > > > > -- ------------ | A Y R | | T O N | ------------ + 55 21 9982 6313 http://ayrton360.com http://rio.360cities.net http://vrfolio.com http://ayrton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasOn Thu, 08 May 2008 15:10:27 +0900, AYRTON <avi@...> wrote:
> On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Roger D. Williams <roger@...> > wrote: > >> >> You might also like to consider the Tamron 11-18. > > > Thanks Roger > Do you have one ??? > And do you like it ? > > I can't find any reviews on that lens ... I have it and LOVE it. It is only ever off my D200 when I have my Nikon 10.5mm fisheye on. I do have the set zoom that came with the D200, 18-70mm, but I seldom use it. I'm a wide guy... <g> Roger W. > Cheers > AYRTON > > > >> The range is rather >> narrower than some, but is OK if you have the usual 18-70 (or whatever) >> to go with it for the wider stuff. I looked at all of these choices, >> although I must admit that although I like the image quality of the >> Nikon it was outside my price range. I was warned off the Sigma 10-20 >> by an apparently knowledgeable camera shop assistant, but I have no >> experience to back up his opinion. >> >> I like the colour rendition of this lens, and image quality is very >> good, although you can find chromatic aberration at the outer edges >> if you zoom in far enough. It's easily removed in RAW, though... >> >> Roger W. >> >> -- >> Work: www.adex-japan.com >> Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger >> >> ------------------------------------ >> >> -- >> >> >> >> > > -- Work: www.adex-japan.com Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasRoger D. Williams wrote:
> I like the colour rendition of this lens, and image quality is very > good, although you can find chromatic aberration at the outer edges > if you zoom in far enough. It's easily removed in RAW, though... Of course, if one is happy to post-process, other aberrations can be removed, which might make the decision process "interesting". BugBear |
|
|
Re: NOT for PanoramasOn Thu, 08 May 2008 20:14:51 +0900, paul womack <pwomack@...>
wrote: > Roger D. Williams wrote: >> I like the colour rendition of this lens, and image quality is very >> good, although you can find chromatic aberration at the outer edges >> if you zoom in far enough. It's easily removed in RAW, though... > > Of course, if one is happy to post-process, other aberrations > can be removed, which might make the decision process > "interesting". I don't find post processing at all "interesting" and it might give you an idea of the extent of the CA problem with this lens if I tell you that I never bother to remove it. I did, once or twice, to see if there was any significant difference. The answer is "no." As I said above, you can FIND it, but you have to LOOK for it. Roger -- Work: www.adex-japan.com Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger |
|
|
RE: NOT for PanoramasCA correction also has the added effect of increasing sharpness throughout
the image, despite the fact you don't see the fringes, which can be a good thing for wide angles. It wasn't asked, but for the canon side the 10-22 is awesome. I've asked around if the full frame version.. I think it's the (16 or 15)-35 2.8 is as good, and I can't seem to find anyone with a good answer except for it's L and 2.8 so buy it. They would have the same FOV. I've heard it that the 10-22 uses the same glass composition as an L lens. I think my primary argument would be that on a crop camera the center optics are used more than the outside optics like a full frame ccd would show.. So it could be a toss up for quality, or not. I'd really like to know. Sacha Griffin Southern Digital Solutions LLC http://www.southern-digital.com http://www.seeit360.net 404-551-4275 From: PanoToolsNG@... [mailto:PanoToolsNG@...] On Behalf Of Roger D. Williams Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 8:32 PM To: PanoToolsNG@... Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] NOT for Panoramas On Thu, 08 May 2008 20:14:51 +0900, paul womack <pwomack@... <mailto:pwomack%40papermule.co.uk> > wrote: > Roger D. Williams wrote: >> I like the colour rendition of this lens, and image quality is very >> good, although you can find chromatic aberration at the outer edges >> if you zoom in far enough. It's easily removed in RAW, though... > > Of course, if one is happy to post-process, other aberrations > can be removed, which might make the decision process > "interesting". I don't find post processing at all "interesting" and it might give you an idea of the extent of the CA problem with this lens if I tell you that I never bother to remove it. I did, once or twice, to see if there was any significant difference. The answer is "no." As I said above, you can FIND it, but you have to LOOK for it. Roger -- Work: www.adex-japan.com Play: www.usefilm.com/member/roger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |