Help on WIDE ANGLE lens choice!

[Igor]

Hi everybody!
Can anyone help me to choose the best wide angle lens for the S2? Yeah, I know, I know, they all are best for different prices/shooting/conditions/your taste/etc... Anyway, I'm not talking about $1,000+ 12-24mm, the price range of $400-600 is considered.
Also: prime or zoom? Nikon or Sigma/Tamron/etc.

Please send your comments and recommendations.

Thanks.

[Swampy]

There are some great posts here Igor, I suggest you look through even old posts here when looking for lenses. If you can't find enough info, ask some more then.

I have Nikkor and Sigma lenses and I'm extremely happy with both. Of course the Nikkor is giving me some better performace than the Sigmas, but the Sigmas do deliver some excellent results. You can read about the lenses I have in the link below.

http://s2pro.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=989

I can talk more about the Sigma 50-500mm now since I've used it more. It's a great lens considering it's a "10x" zoom.

You can read some more about the Nikkor 70-200VR under my post in the Photos section here too.

[Igor]

Thanks, I read many threads (including) this you point me to, but still can't decide: too many options.

I come to a conclusion I should buy them all :), but I need only one good WIDE angle lens.

Also I'm searching for some sample pix taken by S2 with different wide angles, any links?

Thanks.

[sandman]

Igor

Used the wide end of a sigma 17-35mm for this shot ,it's just a snapshot to remind me of the day out , and i liked the colour in the bouy, and the line of the gangplank, compositions not much i know ,but the pub in the background serves a great pint. You must watch out for the sun creeping in , i did'nt use a hood, just turned and snapped, it's a big lense 82mm filter. but all wide zooms are.

All in all i like the lense , i'm not a technical photographer so i can't quote you all the specs, but i like it.

Post some landscapes of the ukraine, it's a part of the old U.S.S.R. most of us don't often see.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[Igor]

Hi Sandman,
thanks for comments and the photo. The bouy really looks good!

I read reviews about Nikon 18-35mm being as good as 17-35mm but twice cheaper, have you tried it?

As for the Ukraine, it's really a blossoming country with a great mild beaty nature. Unfortunately people (spoiled by Russian communists) spoil the picture a bit with their ugly angry faces, just ignore them :)

Visit my two photo sites, there are some pics you might like:
www.s2pix.com
www.geocities.com/uni1ua

Regards,

[sandman]

Igor
No i have'nt tried the nikon, one wide angle is enough for me , but being nikon it can't be bad.
I think i paid about £400 for the sigma 2 years ago. i can't convert that into roubles for you ..sorry.
I have'nt looked at that pic closely , now i have , it's not a bouy, it's a W.W.2 mine painted red(one of yours?).
Visited your site ,i'm not really into flowers and plants ,but your family look charming , and happy.Can't agree with you about commonists being the only ugly people, you want to see some of them on the building sites i visit, they would have made breznev look like tom cruise.

[Igor]

No need to convert the prices into roubles, it's a Russian currency and I live in the Ukraine. Besides I buy my items on ebay for US$$.

Thanks for the comments on my family.

[sandman]

Sorry , sounds like i hit a raw nerve there. guessed all old soviet currency was the same.
Meant to say it last time, let me congratulate you on your english .

Another pic this time ,same place but at the 35mm end.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[cthornhill]

I am looking at wide lenses too. I have some experience with both the Nikon 17 - 35 and the 18 - 35. Many people I know have either lens, all are very happy.

I just went to Nikon 2.8 glass and I am not excited about going back. On the other hand I have little money - I just went to 2.8 glass....

I think everyone finds the 18 - 35 a good low cost choice. I think I will get a prime instead, since I like working with primes for other reasons.

On the other hand, I have not decied yet, so...here we go again...

I just started evaluating the Tokina 14 2.8 - I may try it for a while. I am shooting buildings, not crowds, so prime is OK.

I would say the posted shots also show that lots of lower cost lenses can still produce great shots. Any wide will do better if the alternative is no shots at all, and if you keep them stopped down a ways the inexpensive ones are often quite good.


Cecil

[bjnicholls]

Just keep in mind the crop factor when selecting a lens. 18mm becomes 27mm, reducing a superwide lens to the equivalent of a modest wide angle. A couple of mm on the very wide end makes for quite a big difference in angle of view. 14mm delivers 21mm equivalent, so I'd look for 14mm and 15mm primes as the only close alternatives to the 12-24mm Nikkor.

I predict that Sigma (especially since they have a small chip DSLR) will offer a new small image circle (DX concept) superwide lens or two as soon as this fall.

[Igor]

Looks like the Sigma 14mm 2.8 EX would be seriously considered?
Anybody can share his/her experience using this lens with the S2?

[cthornhill]

Tom Voegeli has said lots about this lens (good) in other posts - check them out. - CT

[Tom V]

http://www.s2pro.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=126

Deciding between prime lenses and zooms depends on your typical subject matter, what kind of results you are looking for, how you shoot, what else is in your camera bag, and what comprimises you are willing to make.

I have a Sigma 14mm f2.8 and love it. I had gotten used to my 20mm on my film cameras, and really missed that angle of view when I went with the S2 11 months ago. Within a week of getting the S2, I got the 14mm.

I considered the zooms (15-30 or whatever) but concluded that if I had one of the zooms, I would always have it zoomed out (at the wide end) all the time anyway. I don't like zooms that vary the aperture as they zoom, and getting a zoom that was constant aperture is expensive, and big.

Also, of "prime" importance is the amount of distortion. Zooms will certainly have more distortion than a prime lens. Perhaps the Nikon 14mm lens has less distortion than the Sigma, but I am sure it still has some. Either way, I would have to correct it for critical jobs. Distortion is impossible to correct with Photoshop without the aid of a third-party plug-in.

I am not confusing distortion with perspective. Perspective is correctible with Photoshop.

I expect a prime lens to be sharper than a zoom, and sharpness is something I like in my images.

So now I have:
Sigma 14mm 2.8
Nikkor 20mm 2.8
Nikkor 24mm 2.8
Nikkor 35-70 2.8
Nikkor 50mm 1.7
Nikkor 105 2.8 Micro
Sigma 70-210 2.8

When I use the long zoom, I have it at 210mm about 99% of the time. When I use the 35-70, I have it at 35mm about 80% of the time.

I use the 50mm and 105mm the most in the studio for product photography.

I use the 14mm for architectural photography inside and out and need straight lines. As it is, on some shots, I need to correct the distortion with PanoTools (Photoshop plug-in).

See the thread about correcting distortion from my 14mm using PanoTools http://www.s2pro.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=4147

The advantage of a zoom lens is obviously the range available without changing lenses. Changing lenses is what introduces dust into the camera. The less you have to change lenses, the lest dust you get in the camera, and the less you have to clean your sensor.

If I was going to take more candid photos than product photos, I might steer myself more toward the wide zooms. But since I rely on my images for professional purposes (pays the bills), I had to go with image quality over lens flexibility.

[Tom V]

In the above post, I refer to a thread in which Ron Green praises the old manual focus Nikkor 15mm. The lens can be modified to work on the S2 ($80), as Ron has done to his.

I found an auction for just such a lens on ebay. The auction ends August 6th 2003, and is currently about $850.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2943567149&category=3343

I think I would bid on it if I had the money and didn't already have the 14mm.

[Igor]

Thanks Tom, very valuable comments!
I only used my 24-85mm at wide angle, that's what my wide angle shooting experience is limited to.
I was told 24 and 14mm make BIG difference, right?

Unfortunately I can't try these lenses myself unlike you guys. Our best photo store (there are only two in our town) has NO Nikon lenses for sale, you can only PRE-order them paying about 150% cost plus shipping and wait for 1-2 months. And of course no returns! Great service, ain't it ! :)

[Sneakyracer]

Tom, great advice. I use primes almost exclusively. I only own one zoom, a 24-120, which i use to do PR work at activities and parties where its sometimes too crowded to move around to frame people shots properly. The lens has a very good macro range too. But more often than not i use the 85mm f1.8 nikon (its too sharp at times!), the 20mm f2.8 or the 60mm micro.

On my recent trip to cuba i only took my FM2 and a 50mm f1.8 AI and the 20mm thats it. (well i also had my P67 for some shots ;) )

I like to move around and frame the subject.

[ballroom_boy]

Hi there

If you cannot afford the Nikkor 12-24mm f/4 DX then check out the Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5~4.5... I have it and it is great. As mentioned earlier, on an S2 with the 1.5x FOV crop, it is a modest 27mm on the wide end. But the price is right and it performs quite well... especially from 28-35mm. From the reviews I have read, at 35mm, it performs just as well as the Nikkor AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8 -- now that is impressive! And barrel distortion is about the same for most zoom lenses at 18mm.

Good luck with your decision.