that's just me lar bro but if u feel the need for a new body, why stop urself? the D7000's noise performance is amazing though

Lol Feels good mang.

---

Added on March 1, 2011, 1:29 pmYes in Curtin

This post has been edited by sakurakinomoto: Mar 1 2011, 01:29 PM

CY, u are using Demb flash products right?where did you purchase it?

From an online trader, can't remember his name already lol. Search around in photomalaysia.com

Have you tried 11-16 ? The distortion is very very well control !
Nothing to do with the frama IIRC. Is the lens. Sigma 10-20 very ugly distortion.

The list, personally played all of it.

after trying the 10-24, 12-24 & 11-16 i think the 12-24 has the best IQ ... but distortion wise the 11-16 is well balanced & easily corrected ... just got to love the build quality of the 12-24 though ...

^
Nikkor 12-24 ?

my dream lens...

yup ... i like the build quality of the Nikkor 12-24 more than the Tokina 11-16 ... just cant resist a Nikkor with gold ring ...

This post has been edited by eddy230379: Mar 1 2011, 02:03 PM

The price to pay for

my precious....~

yeah...
thats true..

Going back to your reply, I was looking around and found that the newer 10-24 is indeed better in corner sharpness than the older 12-24. I would tend to think so since the 12-24 came out in 2003 just when the 4Mp D2H came out. So in 6 years, surely the optics must have improved. Moreso to cater for the new 16Mp sensors.

Have a short read;

http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00TiRa

http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00Wahl

You can google and find a lot more comparison threads and most of them will conclude that the 10-24 is superior.

In any case, the 10-24 is 2mm wider and that's quite a bit on the wide end.

http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00T8S2

Regardless of which UWA you take, if you don't employ technique to properly level the camera and not tilt it upwards (or downwards), you will still experience the distortion. That's the inherent limitation of the 35mm (or DX) format.

I have not played with the 11-16. I own the Sigma 10-20. It's not the best but I'm ok with it. Distortion? If you talk about barrel distortion, all UWAs the same.

From the examples I've seen on the forums, it does seem that the Nikon 10-24 is tops.

I think you're drooling at the wrong lens. You should be looking at the better Nikkor 10-24 while being cheaper too than the Nikkor 12-24.

Budget bro.
I think should get a decent body before get one of those lenses.

so from ur opinion...
10-24 nikon is better and reasonable?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperfocal_distance

If you're still not sure, play around with the online calculator below.

http://dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

---

Added on March 1, 2011, 2:22 pmActually my opinion does not matter. Google out for more example and postings and have a read in the above links and make an informed opinion about it.

If you need for yourself to do it, go to BTS and test drive it side by side. The first thing that you will be awed is the 10-24's 10mm wideness.

This post has been edited by jchue73: Mar 1 2011, 02:22 PM

I personally played with 10-24. Distortion really not as good as tokina. Besides, it isn't sharp as of 12-24
I have not come across anyone will suggest that 10-24 over 12-24.
Talking about MP ?
This is dslr. the sensor still basically the same size. Just the push in more pixels in it.
Sigma is the worst. I did mentioned that tokina 11-16 has that too but it's not as complex as Sigma !
You can always say your sigma the best or 10-24 the best tho. Just my 2cent as I played with all the lens I listed up and I know which is good and which is not

go try out those lens urself.
u wont o wrong with either nikon or tokina.
the rest is depends on ur budget and chemistry with the lens liao.

sharpness, IQ...some ppl hav different opinion. maybe lemon copy or wat.
but still u have to try it out urself.

i'll stick to my tokina 11-16mm if u ask me.
but i luv the versatility of nikon 10-24mm.
the copies i tried, both nikon hav better color & contrast but not the details and sharpness on the tokina 11-16; all at tested at f4.
tokina tend to render it a bit darker, but edge to edge sharpness are much better.

That is your own opinion. You may have tested a bad copy. Even the mighty 24mm f/1.4 is not spared with problems. Any lens for that matter.

So after giving you the links (you can also google out for more if you want), you still conclude that you have not come across anyone to suggest the 10-24 over the 12-24?



A higher density sensor will show more flaws of a lens than a lower density sensor. Wrong?

Hmmm, I never said my Sigma was the best. I only indicated that the Sigma was the better compromise for me. I take holiday photographs. I don't shoot for a living.

I believe you when you say you tested all of the UWAs you listed. If you claim to say something is better than another, please back it up. Show samples. If you can't, look for threads to say that the 10-24 is inferior to the 12-24. Else, it will just remain as hearsay...

I tend to agree with that. Nikkor glasses produce better colour and details out of the camera.

U pay for the Nikkor , even their DX lenses are not exactly cheap to begin with