'Affordable' ultra-wide options for full frame Nikon?

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Fraser 13 Apr 2016
Any suggestions as to how best achieve this set-up? I currently have a D7000 but am considering going full-frame if I could get something affordable (£1200-ish) and it would be at the ultra-wide end of the spectrum. I currently have a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 but it's only DX, so I'd get no real gain switching that onto a full frame body.

I'd definitely consider a used body/lens combo if there's something suitable out there.
 James Rushforth Global Crag Moderator 13 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

I've used the following three lenses:

Nikon 16-35 is very good for the price if you can pick one up used.

Samyang 14mm prime is great value for money but only manual focus.

Nikon 14-24 is obviously excellent but a bit out of the price range.

Other ones to consider that get good reviews that I've not used:

Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 DI VC USD
Nikon AF-S 18-35mm F/3.5-4.5G ED (not sure 18 quite counts as 'ultra wide' though).
OP Fraser 13 Apr 2016
In reply to James Rushforth:
Thanks for the tips, I'll check them out. I'd heard of the 14-24mm but as you say, a bit too pricey for me I'm afraid. I think 18mm wouldn't be quite wide enough, I'd like to be able to get the equivalent of the 11mm on the Dx.

Edit: I should also have asked if you had suggestions for the body I might consider with any of the lenses mentioned above? How old dare I go?!
Post edited at 13:55
 James Rushforth Global Crag Moderator 13 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

Should be able to pick up the Nikon D600 for around £600 now if you shop around a bit?

Just be careful with the oil spots on the sensor with some of the older models: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6523861431/nikon-to-offer-d600-replacement...

Failing that if you can stretch to a little bit more you could pick up the Nikon D610 and 16-35 both used for under £1400 I would imagine.
 Andy Hudson 13 Apr 2016
In reply to James Rushforth:

I'm in not too similar position in that I currently have a Nikon D7000 and in the future will probably upgrade to full format, most of the time I just use 18-105 but if I were to buy just 1 lens with a full format (I would stick with Nikon) what would you consider worth looking at, mainly landscape/cityscape photography
OP Fraser 13 Apr 2016
In reply to James Rushforth:

Thanks James, I've seen a few D600's for sale but wasn't sure if they were a good option or not. Cheers.
 James Rushforth Global Crag Moderator 13 Apr 2016
In reply to Andy Hudson:

Hey Andy,

Always a hard one to just pick one less. I guess the 24-70 is the go to lens for most people using full frame. If you shoot landscapes a lot you might want something wider - In which case it's worth starting your research at the Nikon 16-35 or Nikon 18-35.

If you just want a do it all lens the 28-300 is hard to beat. It's not the sharpest but does have amazing image quality considering the zoom range.

But then the versatility of a DSLR lies in the number of different lenses you can use...
 James Rushforth Global Crag Moderator 13 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

The D600 is a really good camera, just marred slightly by the bad press regarding oil spots on some models (it tends to go away with use). Essentially it's the Nikon equivalent of the Canon 6D with slightly better performance but without the wifi / gps.
 john1963 14 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

I wouldn't touch a Nikon d600 it's not often a camera manufacturer brings out an updated camera with only about three differences to the old model and one of those being a new shutter system.Nikon never officially owned up to oil dust problem being there fault but they exchanged Many disgruntled customers d600 for the updated 610 allegedly..
I would opt for a d610 or d800.
 AdrianC 14 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

Not sure if it's any use to you but look from 4:46 on this review youtube.com/watch?v=ISFzKI_uDz8& You might be able to get the equivalent of the 11 mm on the crop sensor that way?
 solostoke 14 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

I have a d600 with a sigma 12 24 hsm lens. Absolutely crazy wide. Brilliant get out of jail lens when the 24 is too tight. Couldn't recommend it enough and cheaper than Nikon.
 Marc Langley 14 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:
Carl Zeiss 21mm Distagon, Amazing lens. Or for the more price conscious and for AF focus, the Nikon 20mm F1.8 is a great lens.

Camera body wise either the Nikon D610 or D750, You should be able to find the second hand. Check the London camera exchange they often have great deals.

Marc
Post edited at 19:00
OP Fraser 14 Apr 2016
In reply to AdrianC:

Thanks, I actually watched that when I was first looking at u/w lenses for the Fx, and by chance came across it again the other day. The only trouble is it would basically become a prime 16mm to get the 'full' image.


In reply to solostoke:
Thanks for this, I'll check out the Sigma, although I'm slightly way of them based on my previous experience with a 10-20mm f/3.5 which was very soft and sold, to get the Tokina.

In reply to MJL:
Neither of those lenses would be wide enough for my requirements I'm afraid, but thanks for the suggestions. I saw a review for the D700 which looks quite enticing, seems highly praised and is quite good value second hand. Okay, it's only 12Mp but I could probably live with that if the rest of the performance is as good as it seems. I'll check out the D750 too but I imagined that's a noticeable upgrade from the D700, not least in terms of cost.
 Marc Langley 15 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

Hey no problem buddy,

I wouldn't get to hung up on the amount of MP's the camera has unless you are planning to blow your images up to the size of Stanage haha. The D610 is cheaper than the D750 but it is a great camera.

Good luck with your purchase
OP Fraser 15 Apr 2016
In reply to Marc Langley:

Thanks. I've never actually printed out any of my images. I keep meaning to print some just to see what they're like larger scale but always seem to end up viewing them on screen. Maybe a purchase will expedite the journey into prints.
 nic mullin 15 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

the D700 is a great camera and much more sturdily built than the more recent nikon bodies like the d600/610 and D750. They're going for less than £500 in good condition second hand from shops that will give you a guarantee at the moment, which would leave you a decent amount of change from your £1200 budget to spend on lenses.

If you shoot action/sports a D3 might be worth a look too - essentially the same camera but more FPS in a bigger body with a vertical grip that's sturdier again.

Both are significantly heavier than the newer cameras, have less pixels and don't do video. On the plus side they do more FPS (MBD10 grip needed for D700 for this, about £50 second hand now) and have dedicated buttons for AF (most of the newer cameras ditch these for video controls).

I have a D700 and have made bigish prints from heavily cropped images - the bigger the print, the further away you stand when you look at it so pixels aren't as much of an issue as you'd think. Nobody apart from you will look at your pics at 100% on a monitor. 12MP to 24MP is only 1.4 times more resolution in each direction so the difference isn't as big as it sounds. Having said that, if you take a lot of landscapes more pixels is never a bad thing and it could well be worth going for one of the newer, slower handling bodies.

Lens wise, what do you use your ultrawide for? I find that apart from landscapes under stars and estate agent style pictures of the inside of houses, absolute field of view isn't a huge consideration. Small changes in focal length at the wide end do make a big difference to FOV, but a bigger difference to the price!

I've had the 18-35 AF-D (good lens, and I believe the newer G version is better) and the 20mm 1.8 g - these are more than wide enough for the vast majority of my "regular" photography. For when I need the biggest FOV I can get I compromise on IQ and distortion and use a cheap 16mm fisheye (180 degree diagonal) which gives a bigger FOV than almost any "regular" lens. Obviously, you might be shooting something that needs low distortion and good edge performance, so it might not be the way to go for you. However, if you can compromise, it's cheaper, lighter and some would argue more versatile than getting "one ultrawide to rule them all" - the 20mm and the fisheye together cost me less than the 16-35 would have done, goes wider in absolute terms, and lets in a lot more light.

If you don't mind selling them again afterwards, you won't lose much money on a second hand lens (as long as you don't break it!), it's worth experimenting - I bought my 18-35 to see what I wanted from an ultrawide, got two years use out of it, learned a lot, got some pics I really liked and sold it for £25 less than I bought it for.

Hope that helps. Whichever way you go, enjoy your new kit!
OP Fraser 15 Apr 2016
In reply to nic mullin:

That helps a lot, thanks very much. I hadn't actually appreciated that the D700 doesn't have video capability but that's not a deal breaker for me, as I rarely use video on my current camera. I suppose it's a useful thing to have, but it's not a prerequisite for me. Your comments about the printing / resolution is also worth noting, cheers.

I've seen a used D700 for £475, which would leave a fair wedge for lens(es) Jessops are doing the 16-35mm new for £714 after cashback which sounds quite a decent deal. Plus I have my current set-up I can flog to offset the expense.

I currently use the Tokina for action and architectural shots; for me, distortion isn't really an issue in the former and tbh even the latter I don't mind some.
 john1963 15 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

If your using a d700 for walking or climbing I would handle one first its a beast of a camera weighing in more than a d810. I never considered the d700 because of this so it would be great to know how you get on with it.
Good luck with whatever you choose sir.
OP Fraser 15 Apr 2016
In reply to john1963:

Hmm, I see what you mean. My D7000 is 780g (incl. battery) and the D700 is 1085g!
 john1963 15 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

Just an argument against my own point, with fx cameras there's a bigger choice of prime wide angle lenses that would keep the weight down.
 George Fisher 16 Apr 2016
In reply to Fraser:

I am in the same position and have been thinking about this for a while. Not got around to actually getting it sorted.

I already own a manual focus 20mm prime that I use with film bodies, I think I payed £175 for it. I was thinking that a used D600 for £550-600 with a warranty to give me a little time to see if it had any shutter problems. (Or a D610 for a bit more).

That seems to be the cheapest wide angle option. A bit limited to one focal length perhaps but some left in the budget for a standard zoom for general photography.


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...