Well, here we go.
I sold all my equipment, a 50m left only 1.8 and a Sb-600. My idea is to stay in the DX, so I bought a Tamron 17-50 (non-bin). Buy some Ai-s lenses Manual Focus. I'll jab all in one D7000.
I like traveling, I have no children.
Aa grandea questions:
Why should I buy a Tokina 11-16?
I debated between the Tokina 11-16, and the Tokina 12-24. In the end, I decided that I did not need the f/2.8 on a wide angle, and went with the older 12-24. I found one used on Adorama for $300. I Saved some money, and I'm very happy with the focal range.
Your needs are probably different, as you have the 17-50... Just thought I'd throw it out there. There is an active tokina 12-24 group on Flickr if you want to check out some shots.
Especially on DX, it is a really cool lens to have. For travel photography, I could easily see a kit that is the 11-16, 35 f/1.8 and the 18-200. I recently traveled to Europ and Asia for four out of five weeks, and these were the 3 main lenses I used.
I love my Tamron 28-75, and it is what I use 65%+ of the time when I'm shooting people and landscapes, but those three lenses cover a lot of span and shooting situations. My 11-16 was awfully cool to have when I was trying to get a lot of real estate in the frame or in dark churches...
Reason to buy: excellent sharpness, super wide, as fast as it kinda gets at that focal length. Also solid build quality and works well with filters.
Reasons not to buy: almost pointless range of 11-16mm -- many will miss the 16-24mm (I got used to it). Doesn't say Nikon on it. (some people care). No AFS, some don't like the pull/clutch Manual mode. (it's not a big deal)
What you really need to ask yourself is: Do you need a super wide at F/2.8? It's the only game in town.
It is the best UWA lens for DX. I also had 12-24 Tokina but 11-16 was sharper and better. However I believe 12-24 offered more practical range for most shooters. Since you will have 17-50, 11-16 might be better for you.
Steven Park wrote:
It is the best UWA lens for DX. I also had 12-24 Tokina but 11-16 was sharper and better. However I believe 12-24 offered more practical range for most shooters. Since you will have 17-50, 11-16 might be better for you.
Let me see if a find a good 11-16 for sale around the foruns
Before I had an FX camera I was strongly considering it to go along with my D7000. I now have a 17-35mm on my D3 which is like an 11-24 on DX and my God it's awesome so I'd say go with the 11-16!
I like mine. It's quite sharp and the constant f2.8 is really useful for low light situations. There's actually a new version out that has an autofocus motor which well you don't need since you would be using it on a D7000. However, it's unclear if the new one is better optically.
